Bluestem Prairie

Munson and Mankato Free Press disagree about coverage of state Storm the Capitol rally

In Mankato, there's an interesting side note to the passage of HR1. In House passes resolution to ‘denounce violence’ and ‘support our democracy’, Mike Cook of Session Daily sums up the chamber's discussion:

The House voted Monday to express disdain with the Jan. 6 insurrection at the U.S. Capitol and support the 2020 certified election results.

We wrote it up in MN House passes resolution opposing violence, supporting democracy, some members pass.

Here's the core of the matter behind the Mankato kerfuffle. On the floor of the Minnesota House on January 25, New Republicans Steve Drazkowski, Mazeppa, and Jeremy Munson, Lake Crystal, objected to a January 11 headline in the Mankato Free Press, House to investigate Akland, Munson over state Capitol rally.

Reporter Trey Mewes followed up with Munson: Rally probe will hurt communication; Threats to Walz prompted investigation on January 14. 

Mewes  reported on January 23, BCA clears lawmakers, speakers at Capitol rally of criminal activity. That's two days before the theater on the floor.

Here's the video of the episode on the House floor; the YouTube will scroll forward and start with Drazkowski's remarks and continue until the end of the second request for a roll call on Draz's amendment:

There's a moment with Prinsburg New Republican Tim Miller talking about a DNR conservation officer responding to the Speaker's criticism of members at the January 6 rally.

Watch the debate and draw your own conclusions.

Representative Munson wasn't letting it go. On Sunday, the Free Press published his counterpoint, In Response: Munson: Free Press was reckless in reporting political story:

The Mankato Free Press recklessly reported a lie when it quoted a slanderous, inflammatory, and unethical statement made by DFL House Speaker Melissa Hortman against six Republican state representatives. These untruthful statements and baseless accusations were used to damage reputations and intimidate legislators from speaking about election laws.

In the article, “House to investigate Akland, Munson over state Capitol rally,” the paper quoted the speaker as stating, “We’re investigating whether there were members of the Minnesota House of Representatives who advocated for, incited or supported acts of domestic terrorism.” Before printing the article, the newspaper never checked the truthfulness of this statement, inquired about the basis for the accusations, listened to the actual speeches, or asked for a response.

Instead, the lies were printed and the events were represented in a manner that insinuated further untruths.

Here are the facts: On Jan. 25, House Majority Leader Ryan Winkler (DFL) confirmed publicly on the House floor there is not and never has been a House investigation on anyone who attended the rally on Jan. 6. Furthermore, Winkler agreed The Free Press’ headline was inaccurate. When the speaker made her false accusations of criminal activity, she had no basis. This is why the BCA also never opened an investigation or even called a single Minnesota legislator regarding the rally.

There were no violence or riots in St. Paul. In a later article, The Free Press reported videos showed Rep. Susan Akland and I did not use inciteful rhetoric or calls to violence. However, even after acknowledging there was no criminal activity, inciteful rhetoric, or investigations of any kind, the newspaper still refused to retract its original article or even amend its title.

In two later articles, the paper reprinted the speaker’s unsubstantiated and baseless accusations of criminal activity and claims of investigations without pointing out their known falsehood.

The paper had reason to know its headline was false before printing, as the House does not investigate crimes. Furthermore, the paper ran these stories with reckless disregard for the truth to create controversy and damage the reputations of Republicans.

I take these slanderous and untruthful statements seriously. They are hurtful to the representatives and their families, and more importantly, slanderous statements and reckless reporting further people’s mistrust in the media and government.

As a result of the paper’s reckless reporting of lies and unwillingness to attempt to fix the damage it caused, the paper is willfully allowing a Democrat opponent and left-leaning groups to use the paper as a vehicle to spread lies and misinformation about myself and Rep. Akland.

This lack of journalistic and leadership ethics is toxic to the voice of the people. We do not want legislators screening constituents. In an average year, we frequently have all kinds of rallies and protests at the Minnesota Capitol. It is wonderful to see people taking time to exercise their constitutional rights.

When possible, I attend these events to better understand people’s concerns and share my thoughts with groups whose ideas I support, as well as oppose. I intend to continue, as I feel it is an important part of my job.

Unfortunately, I am now hearing some legislators questioning if this is wise. This is the result of unethical behavior by House leadership, and a media who willfully perpetuates her slanderous accusations and statements even after they were shown to be lies.

Rep. Jeremy Munson, R-Lake Crystal, represents District 23B in the Minnesota House of Representatives.

Free Press editor Joe Spears replies in Editor's Note: Free Press stands by stories:

The Free Press stands by the accuracy and fairness of its stories on the state Capitol rally referred to by Rep. Jeremy Munson in the adjacent opinion column.

The Free Press asked for responses from Republican Reps. Munson and Susan Akland on a number of occasions, and both were afforded additional chances to respond in a follow-up stories in reaction to House Speaker Melissa Hortman’s statements.

In one conversation, Munson shouted profanities multiple times at a Free Press reporter.

The way Munson describes House Majority Leader Ryan Winkler’s statement that The Free Press headline was “inaccurate” is missing important context. Here is what Winkler said when pressed several times on the House floor by GOP Rep. Steve Drazkowski: ““Madam Speaker, Rep. Drazkowski, as I said, I haven’t actually seen the headline. The statement you just made purporting to be a headline sounds inaccurate, but I haven’t read the article so it’s very difficult to provide that context.”

Munson’s assertion that “there is not and never has been a House investigation” refers to actions, not what was said by the House speaker. The Free Press correctly quoted the House speaker and did a follow-up story quoting the state Bureau of Criminal Apprehension on the completion of its inquiry.

The BCA reviewed footage of the rally and spoke to one rally speaker. It recommended no criminal charges be filed. One could reasonably call the BCA’s actions an investigation into what happened, even if no formal action was taken. Other media and the official House Public Information office described the events in the same way.

The Free Press described the House process to look into the rally in an article that ran Jan. 23, when the BCA cleared Munson, Akland and other speakers.

The Free Press has covered hundreds of politicians over its century plus of existence. It is reasonable to suggest these political leaders sometimes do not tell the truth. We make every effort to follow up to get to the bottom of misleading or inaccurate statements when this happens, and that is what we have done in this case.

The Free Press has been recognized by established news industry trade organizations, its peers and the public for its high quality journalism. We take all criticism seriously.

Joe Spear is editor of The Free Press. 

It's an interesting moment in public discourse. 

The text of HR1 can be read in our post, MN House passes resolution opposing violence, supporting democracy, some members pass.

Screengrab: Jeremy Munson speaking via Zoom during the January 25 Minnesota House floor session.

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post. Those wishing to make a small ongoing monthly contribution should click on the  paypal subscription button.

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

NEW: I'm now on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

Rep. Vang renews effort to ban Minnesota's unsustainable commercial turtle harvest

Last session, we reported on the bill to end Minnesota's commercial turtle harvest introduced by state representative Samantha Vang, DFL-Brooklyn Center. Here's 2019's  Vang bill will end MN commercial turtle selling and Months after hearings, Star Tribune reports on commercial turtle harvesting concerns 

The proposal is back. Minnesota House Environment and Natural Resources Finance and Policy Committee chair Rick Hansen, DFL-S. St. Paul tweeted on Sunday:

Thank you. @RepSamanthaVang HF387, a bill that would ban commercial harvest of Minnesota's 🐢turtles.🐢Harvest for personal use would still be allowed. Commercial harvest is unsustainable✅Bill details at: https://t.co/ascWYSTpvo #SaveOurTurtles #turtles #mnleg #sustainability pic.twitter.com/b9C96l5R9u

— Rep. Rick Hansen (@reprickhansen) January 31, 2021

Read the bill here.

Our February 2020 post  Minnesota Herpetological Society commercial turtle harvest factsheet tells all includes a wealth of information about commercial turtle harvests in the North Star state.

Last year, wildlife biologist Christopher Smith, who sits on the Board of Directors for the Center for North American Herpetology (CNAH) started  a petition to support the bill. We're not sure what strategy supporters will adopt this year, but we'll try to keep readers posted.

Update: Updated commercial turtle harvest numbers from DNR underscore need for HF387

Photo: Turtle champion state representative Samantha Vang.

If you appreciate our posts and original analysis, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post. Those wishing to make a small ongoing monthly contribution should click on the  paypal subscription button.

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

NEW: I'm now on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6 

If you appreciate our posts and original analysis, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post. Those wishing to make a small ongoing monthly contribution should click on the  paypal subscription button.

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

NEW: I'm now on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6 

North Mankato natural lawn fight update: Borchardt sues city for public nuisance order

In posts like 2019's Buzz kill: North Mankato Planning Commission not so much into lawns to legumes and more recently North Mankato declares “Monarch Wayfair” lawn a public nuisance from “infestation of the premises by plants, animals, and birds” and Strib picks up North Mankato lawn police story, we've looked at the situation Edward Borchardt has faced from those who prefer an older version of yards.

Now Borchardt is seeking legal relief. For the Mankato Free Press, Tim Krohn reports in Resident files suit against North Mankato citing yard as 'public nuisance':

A North Mankato man is asking a court to throw out a decision by the City Council that declared his property a “public nuisance.”

Ed Borchardt argues that the city of North Mankato’s Dec. 7 decision was based on unconstitutionally vague language in city code and was arbitrary and capricious.

Based on some complaints by his neighbors, Borchardt was pushed by the city for years to cut brush and overgrown vegetation in his yard, eliminate plantings that are too close to the street, and remove personal property that was not properly stored.

Last fall some residents helped 80-year-old Borchardt clear much of the yard, but the city concluded the property on 229 Allan Ave. was still out of compliance and continued to draw complaints.

Borchardt’s attorney, Karl O. Friedrichs, wrote in a Nicollet County District Court filing that the city’s ordinance is not only filled with “vague and subjective language,” but that the city didn’t follow language in the code and is subjectively using it against one property owner.

Part of the code refers to unkempt properties that draw complaints from a “considerable number of members of the public.” But Friedrichs said the property, owned by Borchardt and his wife, Ann, only drew complaints from two residents, which doesn’t constitute a “considerable number.”

The suit also says the decision was based on “the subjective opinion of the enforcement officer” and wasn’t supported by evidence presented by Borchardt and other residents who spoke in support of him. . . .

Read the rest at the Free Press.  

Earlier, on January 19, Krohn reported in North Mankato delays vote on 'natural yards' ordinance:

 After a year of discussion, criticism, debate and changes, a proposed “natural managed lawn area” ordinance still failed to get a vote in North Mankato Tuesday night as council members and some residents said there were still too many unanswered questions.

The council held a public hearing and was expected to vote on an ordinance setting down rules for property owners who want to put in native plantings or pollinator gardens. But more than a dozen residents, mostly opposed to the ordinance, raised a variety of questions and the council voted to table the issue until the next meeting.

Critics said they felt the ordinance was not well written, too restrictive on those who want to have natural native plantings and was being pushed through too quickly. . . .

During the public hearing, resident Kathleen Felt said she was more comfortable with the latest proposed ordinance, which has been changed considerably from its original form early last year. “I appreciate this ordinance has less restrictions than the earlier draft we saw.” But she said the proposed setbacks would make it impossible for owners of some smaller lots and corner lots in lower North Mankato to plant a native plant area.

Barb Church was among several speakers who said they believed the ordinance was being pushed through too fast and wondered who the city was trying to protect by enacting an ordinance.

“So many times I’ve heard ‘the city needs to keep control’... I wonder what the council is afraid of... what are you trying to protect us from?”

Bess Tsaouse said the ordinance was “not very well written,” and said the city did not understand the nuances of native plantings.

Lucy Lowry and Tom Hagen said they believed the city was passing the ordinance only to target Edward Borchardt, who the city has tussled with for years over the look of his yard on Allan Avenue. . . . 

The Free Press conducted an unscientific readers poll and posted the results in January 18th's Reader Response: North Mankato shouldn't adopt lawn ordinance:

A majority of area respondents don’t support the city of North Mankato’s proposed natural lawn ordinance, according to a Free Press online question.

Out of 221 total respondents, 138 voters — more than 62% of the vote — don’t agree with North Mankato’s proposal. Another 83 voters disagreed.

The proposed ordinance has been revised significantly from its early form, removing some restrictions that proponents of natural yards had been opposed to.

The final draft would allow residents to have up to 500 square feet, or 30%, whichever is less, of the non-pervious portion of their yard converted to a managed native planting area, often called pollinator gardens or native prairie gardens.

The previous version of the draft limited the plantings to 250 square feet and said if people wanted areas larger than 250 square feet, they would have to go through a city permitting process and get approval from neighbors.

City Planner Matt Lassonde said that for up to 500 square feet or 30% residents would not have to get any permits, neighbor approval or submit plans to the city.

Lassonde said that as they studied cities in Minnesota that have natural lawn ordinances, many required permits, drawings and plans produced by a landscape architect before people can plant any natural native grass area.

A group of residents has opposed the city’s work on the ordinance since the start and several are expected to speak at Tuesday’s public hearing.

Resident Tom Hagen said the proposed ordinance is not needed and believes it was drafted to go after one city resident — Edward Borchardt — who the city has tussled with for years over the look of his yard on Allan Avenue.

Some neighbors filed complaints about Borchardt’s yard, and the city had on several occasions told him it was too overgrown with vegetation and shrubs as well as plantings too close to the street.

The Free Press online question, sent out Saturday, asked, “Do you support the city of North Mankato’s natural lawn ordinance proposal?”

There were two options to answer, “yes” or “no.”

A majority of commenters oppose the ordinance proposal. Most are concerned the ordinance is too overreaching and would be tough to enforce. Some commenters say the ordinance is needed to prevent a few from abusing lawn ordinances, while others say the city should embrace more natural lawns.

Ron Leech wrote, “If one wants a natural lawn, move to the country.”

“If passed as written, the City will have a hard time enforcing it because it won’t accomplish its intended purpose,” Douglas Schaller wrote. “The bigger issue however is the idea expressed by some of the elected officials that the ordinance will give us more freedom or liberty allowing these gardens. Laws do not give liberty, they only restrict liberty. If this is supposed to give us more rights, then there is already a city code restricting our freedoms which should be amended instead of creating another one. Appoint a citizen’s committee with biology professionals and everyday people to develop this code the right way the first time.”

Monika Antonelli wrote, “I do not support the ordinance. Especially the part about limiting a natural yard to 30% of a property. The planet needs all of us to go natural with our yards. I have an idea, how about we limit neighbors from pouring cancer causing chemicals on their lawns while also wasting a valuable resource like water.”

Jim Muyres wrote, “Cities all across the nation are embracing non-traditional lawns that reduce noise and air pollution from mowing, reduce chemicals in our water and air, and provide beneficial plants for wildlife, insects and improve the global climate. They say it is for public health but exempt non-residential and city property, that is hypocrisy. Hundreds of existing lots with homes built in natural wooded areas, with ravines or natural areas will be in violation of this ordinance. Clumps of ornamental grasses like they have in front of City Hall and the library will have to be cut to six inches or less in your yard.”

We'll continue to watch this tussle.

Flattering, but not our mission

One oddity we discovered in researching for this post was a listing of this blog as a pollinator resource on the City of North Mankato's Pollinator Information & Resources page (screenshot below).

This is deeply embarrassing to us, as this is a micro-niche blog about upper Midwest rural politics. We hope the City of North Mankato replaces the link with solid scientific sites such as the Minnesota Zoo's  Plant for Pollinators! page, the University of Minnesota's Bee Lab's Planting flowers for Minnesota bees: bee lawns, tea gardens, and plant lists and the  Monarch Joint Venture page. 

Photo: "Ed Borchardt, 80, a natural-yard advocate and former botany professor, has been ordered by the city of North Mankato to clean up “rank growth” on his property." Photo by John Reinan, Star Tribune, in Retired professor fights to keep his North Mankato yard natural.

If you appreciate our posts and original analysis, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post. Those wishing to make a small ongoing monthly contribution should click on the  paypal subscription button.

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

NEW: I'm now on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6 

[VIDEO] MNHouse HF228 would require timely update to state's invasive species plan

We'll post the video of the House Environment and Natural Resources Finance and Policy Committee'z hearing on  HF228 when it is available.

[Update]Here's the video:

Here's a lovely tweet about one scientist testifying to the committee:

Hey, we know her! MAISRC Grad Fellow, Naomi Blinick testified today at the #MNLeg's House Environment and Natural Resources Finance & Policy Committee hearing. We are very happy & proud of her! Naomi's research focuses on zebra mussel impacts in MN lakes: https://t.co/obx5yK7oZ0 pic.twitter.com/QLbCgL326Y

— MAISRC (@AISresearchMN) January 28, 2021

One committee member tweeted her appreciation:

Just a reminder.

Women in STEM deserve the same amount of respect as men in this field, if not more. @NaomiBlinick did an amazing job in committee today. 👏 Keep up the GREAT work. We see you and appreciate you.
🌎

That's it!

— Rep. Heather Keeler (@RepKeeler) January 28, 2021

From Session Daily

Bill would require timely update to state's invasive species plan

By Nate Gotlieb

Minnesota's plan for slowing the spread of invasive species may need to be updated every five years.

Sponsored by Rep. Patty Acomb (DFL-Minnetonka), HF228 would require the DNR to update the plan by Dec. 31, 2021, and every five years thereafter. It would also require the plan to address the impacts of climate change on invasive species management.

The bill, held over Thursday in the House Environment and Natural Resources Finance and Policy Committee, does not have a Senate companion.

State law requires the DNR to prepare and maintain a long-term plan for invasive species that includes specific plans for individual species.

The law does not say how often the plan, which was most recently completed in 2009, must be updated, though the DNR began work to update it last year.

Acomb said the plan should be updated on a regular basis and that it's important to account for the impacts of climate change on the spread of invasive species.

"We need to be looking at everything from a more comprehensive stance to make sure we're not missing things," said Naomi Blinick, a conservation sciences graduate student.

Rep. Josh Heintzeman (R-Nisswa) noted the DNR already considers the effects of climate change and said he hopes the committee will tackle more substantial issues.

We'll have more on this story as video is available.

Photo: Zebra mussels. From the Bemidji Pioneer story, Minnesota DNR officials discover zebra mussel larvae in Lake Winnie | Bemidji Pioneer.

If you appreciate our posts and original analysis, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post. Those wishing to make a small ongoing monthly contribution should click on the  paypal subscription button.

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

NEW: I'm now on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6 

Echo Press corrects its report that no MN House GOP spoke on anti-violence resolution

UPDATE:  Via the Echo Press's Facebook page, we've learned that the paper has corrected its copy. The message: "Thank you for pointing this out. The story has been corrected to say that no Republican spoke in support of the measure. -- Echo Press News Editor Al Edenloff." 

Our original headline for this post read Huh? DL-Online & Echo Press report no MN House GOP spoke on anti-violence resolution [end update]

It's often the little things that count in how the public comes to understand a story, and reporting in two Forum Communications papers in Detriot Lake and Alexandria on Wednesday illustrate how things can go awry.

First, it's important to note a passage in a Mike Cook story in Session Daily, House passes resolution to ‘denounce violence’ and ‘support our democracy’:

No Republicans spoke in support of the resolution.

In State Rep. Steve Green votes against resolution condemning violence and supporting democracy, by  Detriot Lakes Tribune editor Nathan Bowe reports:

“The votes and the voices based on the votes of our citizens and our residents should be heard and should be counted. No one should have any fear that their vote won’t be counted and no one should have any fear moving forward that those votes and their right to vote will be suppressed,” said Rep. Cedrick Frazier (DFL-New Hope), according to the Session Daily summary. No Republican spoke on the measure.

That copy is recycled in an article that appeared in the Alexandria Echo Press about an hour later. This content appeared up column in State Rep. Jeff Backer votes against resolution condemning violence and supporting democracy; Franson doesn't vote:

State Rep. Jeff Backer, R-Browns Valley, was among just eight members of the Minnesota House of Representatives, all Republicans, to vote against a resolution “condemning violence and violent rhetoric directed at our United States Capitol and state capitols, and affirming support for democracy, rule of law, and the certified results of Minnesota's election and the elections of the other states.”

The resolution passed 111-8 on Monday, Jan. 25, according to Session Daily.

Backer represents District 12A, which includes part of Douglas County.

State Rep. Mary Franson, R-Alexandria, did not vote on the resolution. She represents District 8B.

State Rep. Paul Anderson, R-Starbuck, voted in favor of the resolution. He represents District 12B, which includes part of Douglas County.

That's followed down column with this:

“The votes and the voices based on the votes of our citizens and our residents should be heard and should be counted. No one should have any fear that their vote won’t be counted and no one should have any fear moving forward that those votes and their right to vote will be suppressed,” said Rep. Cedrick Frazier, DFL-New Hope, according to the Session Daily summary. No Republican spoke on the measure.

The Session Daily article includes a brief discussion of Republican amendments that failed. 

What's more, Minnesota House Republicans frequently speak up in the Minnesota House Information Services video of the debate. While we don't recall Backer speaking up, Franson speaks at the 43:53 mark. Here's the Youtube, which we'll have to watch again to see whether Green spoke. That's Mazeppa New Republican Steve Drazkowski on the screencap, speaking to his amendment.

We had covered the resolution in MN House passes resolution opposing violence, supporting democracy, some members pass We name the eight no votes, the names of those who passed, and the fact Minneapolis DFL representative Hodan Hassan  was excused for the day, so the absence of the vote didn't mean a pass.

Let's hope that both papers correct their copy. Links to the Session Daily article and the video would help readers to understand the story better.

Board screen shot: From Peter Callaghan's twitter feed.

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post. Those wishing to make a small ongoing monthly contribution should click on the  paypal subscription button.

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

NEW: I'm now on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

Ecklund's HF219 passed out of MN House Environment committee on bipartisan 14-5 vote

It's interesting to see how different news sources reported on the intent of HF219, that was up in the Environment and Natural Resources Finance and Policy committee Tuesday.

At the International Falls Journal, editor Laurel Beager reported in CWD bill aims to reduce risk to wild deer:

A bill co-authored by Rep. Rob Ecklund is aimed at reducing the risk that chronic wasting disease will be spread in Minnesota through carcass transport or escaped farmed deer.

Ecklund, along with Rep. Rick Hansen, DFL-South St. Paul; Rep. Jamie Becker-Finn, DFL-Roseville; and Rep. Mike Sundin, DFL -Esko, - all deer hunters - met online with reporters representing an equally diverse geography Monday to talk about the bill.

House File 219 was heard Tuesday by the House Environment and Natural Resources Committee, chaired by Rep. Hansen, Tuesday, after which it is expected to move forward.

As we note in the headline, the bill passed on a 14-5 vote. Beager continues:

"Overall, it's a good bill for the integrity and health of the wild deer herd," Ecklund said.

The lawmakers noted the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources has in the past been supportive of the provisions that would:

• Allow a licensed deer hunter to kill and possess escaped farmed deer, and other cervidae species, and is not liable to the owner for the loss of the animal. The deer must be tested for CWD at the owner's expense. Owners will be required to provide contact information that enables the deer to be identified as an escaped deer.
• Defines an unloaded muzzle loader.
• Prohibits transport into Minnesota of carcasses obtained by any means.

Opposition to the bill could come from people who farm deer. . . .

Becker-Finn said she was proud to stand with Ecklund for the deer hunters in the state, adding hunting likely draws a more diverse group than people realize.

She also said it's important to protect Minnesota's Constitutional right to protect its hunting heritage and produce a healthy deer herd.

If the spread of CWD is not dealt with, it could be devastating to the hunting industry, Sundin described. . . .

At Session Daily, Nate Gotlieb's Escaped deer provision reinserted into floor-bound natural resources bill skewed toward remarks favoring the farmed cervidae industry, as the title suggests. A taste:

To protect Minnesota's deer herd from a fatal brain disease, a House committee for a second straight year has approved a provision that would allow licensed hunters to shoot and keep escaped farm-raised deer.

HF219, a six-part natural resources bill that includes the provision, was approved 14-5 by the House Environment and Natural Resources Finance and Policy Committee Tuesday and now heads to the House floor. There is no Senate companion.

Bill sponsor Rep. Rob Ecklund (DFL-International Falls) said the aim is to protect Minnesota's wild deer from chronic wasting disease, which is always fatal, has no cure and can survive for years in the environment. . .

Under the bill, hunters who do so would not be required to pay the deer farmer for the animal. The bill also would require the deer farmers to pay to test the animal for CWD.

Rep. Josh Heintzeman (R-Nisswa), voted to approve the bill, but took issue with the escaped deer provision. He said a lot of the escapes are no fault of deer farmers.

Advocates said it would alleviate worries hunters could have over potentially killing a farm-raised animal by accident. They said the provision would only apply to licensed hunters who kill deer during hunting seasons, meaning that it wouldn't apply to hunters who violated property rights to take a farmed animal.

Representing the Minnesota Deer Farmers Association, Tim Spreck said he worries about such situations.

Animals raised by deer farmers can be worth thousands of dollars, given preferred characteristics such as large antlers.

The bill would also require the tags on farm-raised whitetail deer include contact information for the owner, and it would bar the importation of all deer and elk carcasses, not just ones killed by hunters. Other provisions address muzzleloaders and the use of deer stands in certain wildlife management areas.

Rep. Dale Lueck (R-Aitkin) said he thinks that existing tagging provisions are sufficient for connecting the owners of escaped animals with people who encounter them. His motion to refer the bill to the House Agriculture Finance and Policy Committee was defeated 11-8 on a party-line vote.

Here's the video of the committee's consideration of the bill. The YouTube will scroll, then start at the beginning of the discussion of the bill:

Related Posts:

• Press release: DNR continues CWD response with southeast MN, south metro special hunts
• Hunted and roadkill wild deer in Dakota and Olmsted Counties test positive for CWD
• Some of the science at the center of Update on Chronic Wasting Disease Efforts hearing
• Board of Animal Health: Chronic wasting disease confirmed in Houston County farmed deer herd 
• MN DNR: Deer hunters urged to submit samples in chronic wasting disease sampling areas
• Capital Report & Session Daily updates on MN Chronic Wasting Disease research and policy
• MN DNR reminds deer hunters of significant changes to regulations related to CWD
• Session Daily: Experts want to study how CWD flows in state's waterways
• CWD news digest: #Mnleg agenda; Wisconsin confirms 105 recent CWD cases in captive deer
• Douglas County deer farm investigation leads to discovery of Pine County captive doe CWD case
• MNDNR: extensive sampling of wild deer in 2019 shows CWD remains biggest concern in SEMN
• News item: Fillmore County Board gets CWD update; approves refugee resettlement
• Meanwhile in South Dakota: Game, Fish & Parks (GFP) Commission modifies rules related to CWD
• Just in from the MN DNR: Wild deer in Dakota County confirmed positive for CWD
• Meanwhile in MN: four more Chronic Wasting Disease positive deer on Pine County farm
• Capital Report & Session Daily updates on MN Chronic Wasting Disease research and policy

Photo: White-tailed deer in the woods.

If you appreciate our posts and original analysis, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post. Those wishing to make a small ongoing monthly contribution should click on the  paypal subscription button.

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

The spectre of Keynesian economics haunts GOP in House capital investment equity hearing

At Session Daily, Rob Hubbard reports in Could bonding help rectify racial disparities?:

What would closing the gap look like? Several House committees will be addressing that question in coming weeks as they wrestle with “the Minnesota Paradox.”

The term is used to describe the statistics indicating Minnesota boasts a high quality of life, but not for people of color. The state has some of the country’s largest disparities between white residents and minorities when measuring outcomes in economics, education, employment, health and housing.

On Tuesday, the House Capital Investment Committee discussed how the state’s infrastructure investments and bonding projects may be viewed through a racial equity lens. Built around a presentation by Bruce Corrie, an economics professor at St. Paul’s Concordia University, the hearing was informational, but gave a sense of how race may enter into future bonding discussions.

Corrie emphasized that differences between white and minority Minnesotans in wages and wealth-building opportunities — such as advancing an education and buying a home — are costing the state significant economic benefits.

He identified racial disparities in four key areas:

• on average, a Black Minnesotan earns 71 cents for every dollar earned by a white resident, while Native Americans earn 68 cents, Latino Americans 70 cents and Asian-Americans 94 cents;
• there is a 53% homeownership gap between Black and white Minnesotans, while it’s over 30% for Latino and Native Americans, and 25% for Asian-Americans;
• a college graduation gap of 21% exists between white and Black students, with a 19% gap for Native Americans, 12% for Latinos and 4% for Asian-Americans; and
• average sales for businesses owned by Minnesotans of color was $183,000 in 2012, compared to an average of $1.4 million for all firms in the state.

Corrie asserted that if racial gaps were closed in Minnesota people of color would experience a growth in income, assets and lifetime earnings of $287 billion. He also said the state is losing over $2 billion in state and local tax revenue as a result.

Another key element of Corrie’s testimony was that Department of Administration statistics show about 2% of state spending on construction, goods and services has gone to people of color. “This number has not changed in about 20 years,” he said.

To close these gaps, Corrie suggested:

• investing in the building capacity of minority-owned businesses and setting specific goals for them;
• changing rules and regulations that serve as barriers;
• developing mentoring partnerships; and
• monitoring short- and long-term outcomes.

Corrie cited modeling that says if investment geared toward people of color were increased 10%, outputs across Minnesota industries would increase by an estimated $111 billion, and that federal, state and local taxes would increase by $13 billion.

Among the state’s investment tools to leverage private funding, Corrie emphasized loan guarantees to leverage bank lending for communities of color. . . .

Hubbard continues with questions raised by a couple of Republican committee members. We have found that we can't embed  the presentation by Bruce Corrie mentioned in the Session Daily article, so read it at the link earlier in this sentence.

One point in the hearing not in the Session Daily coverage? Representative Rick Hansen suggested that capital investment--infrastructure--is public works, and provided a Keynesian analysis of Corrie's presentation. That prompted a couple of his Republican colleagues to throw up against Keynes thinking.

Here's the clip of Hansen's observations. The Youtube will scroll to the point where they begin and stops at the end. 

On Twitter, Geoff Dittberner quoted the point:

"Over decades we have invested in critical infrastructure based on power...the power resides in systemic racism..." -

Readers can watch the entire presentations and discussions on Youtube here. There's a robust discussion.

Image: South St. Paul artist AJ Wrobel's painting of Representative Rick Hansen at his farm in Southeastern Minnesota--the spectre of demand-side economics.

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post. Those wishing to make a small ongoing monthly contribution should click on the  paypal subscription button.

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

NEW: I'm now on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

Sioux Falls Argus Leader: Noem supports using grand jury to speed up Ravnsborg killing probe

In our efforts to keep readers up-to-date on the investigation of the killing of Joseph Boever by distracted driver South Dakota Attorney General Jason Ravnsborg, we posted States attorneys looking into killing of Joseph Boever by AG Ravnsborg not talking to Noem last week.

On Tuesday morning, Jonathan Ellis and Joe Sneve reported for the Sioux Falls Argus Leader, Gov. Noem supports using grand jury to speed up Jason Ravnsborg investigation:

Gov. Kristi Noem would support using a grand jury to decide whether charges should be filed against Attorney General Jason Ravnsborg over the fatal auto accident he was involved in last summer.

Prosecutors have been reviewing evidence in the Sept. 12 accident, in which Ravnsborg struck and killed 55-year-old Joseph Boever on Highway 14 west of Highmore. Noem and others have been critical that no decision has been made by prosecutors about whether Ravnsborg should face criminal charges.

"Gov. Noem would absolutely support empaneling a grand jury if it can help bring a speedy resolution to this case," Noem spokesman Ian Fury said in an email to the Argus Leader. "As the governor has repeatedly said, it is a grave disservice to Mr. Boever’s family that this issue has not been resolved." . . .

Ravnsborg's fate is in the hands of Deputy State's Attorney Emily Sovell, Sovell is also consulting with Beadle County State's Attorney Michael Moore and Pennington County State's Attorney Mark Vargo.

Moore, who said the team is still awaiting cell phone data and biological evidence last week, also said Monday the case isn't ready to present to a grand jury.

"The first thing a prosecutor has to decide is if they have a case they can prosecute," Moore said. . . .

Subscribers can read the rest of the story at the Argus Leader.

Prosecutors may use complaints or grand juries to file charges, but they usually are confident that a grand jury would find probably cause before they convene one. S

Related posts:

• States attorneys looking into killing of Joseph Boever by AG Ravnsborg not talking to Noem
• Rapid City Journal: After 4 months, still no decision on whether AG Ravnsborg will be charged for killing Joseph Boever
•  AP: Prosecutors waiting on debris testing in SD Attorney General killing of Joseph Boever 
•  Governor Kristi Noem takes off her positive pants, given pace of Ravnsborg investigation

Photo: Joseph Boever, left, was killed while walking on the shoulder of a road, while carrying a light, when a distracted Jason Ravnsborg, right, was distracted while driving and his car drifted onto the shoulder where Boever walking.

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post. Those wishing to make a small ongoing monthly contribution should click on the  paypal subscription button.

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

NEW: I'm now on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

Rapid City GOP lawmakers' bill would require Noem to disclose state costs for campaign trips

In October, Forum News Service columnist Mike McFeely asked Where in the world is Kristi Noem as COVID surges? Likely not South Dakota

Else, another journalist was inquiring about the price tag of this gallivanting.

At the Rapid City Journal in October, Morgan Matzen asked how much did her partisan campaign activity cost South Dakota taxpayers:

When asked whether the state, Noem campaign or Trump campaign pays for the troopers' travel and what the cost is, Seidel said "the governor's security is always state business, and we don't comment on security." Neither Seidel nor Noem's spokesman Ian Fury would disclose the cost, citing security concerns.

Noem was seen in Bangor, Maine in the morning with former Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski and plans to stop in New Hampshire on the campaign trail Wednesday. She was in Omaha, Neb., on Tuesday night for a Trump rally.

Her previous campaign stops include Texas and Wisconsin last week, and upcoming stops in Florida ahead of Tuesday's election.

Those questions remind unanswered--and three Republican state lawmakers want those security costs to be public information.

On Tuesday, Matzen reported in House bill seeks to require Gov. Noem to disclose state costs for trips to campaign for Trump:

Legislators are looking to make public information the Rapid City Journal and other media have sought for more than four months — disclosure of security costs for public officials, including Gov. Kristi Noem.

The House Bill 1089 has been introduced by lawmakers from both parties, including Reps. Taffy Howard, Phil Jensen and Sen. David Johnson, all Republicans from Rapid City.

Howard said the bill would not only require that future costs be disclosed but be applied retroactively so the cost of Noem's security detail while campaigning for President Trump would become part of the public record.

Howard said many constituents asked her about Noem's travel. The Governor's Office, she said, told her that the Trump campaign covered the travel costs but would not disclose the cost of state-supplied security.

"This should be disclosed to every citizen," Howard said Tuesday. "We've asked several times and keep getting stonewalled. Taxpayers have a right to know. This governor wants to be the most transparent administration, and this bill is all about transparency." . . .

The Journal first sought this information in late October when it was revealed that two South Dakota Highway Patrol troopers accompanied Noem to campaign stops for President Donald Trump. The troopers had responded to a threat of a man brandishing two weapons at a stop in Maine.

At the time, two Noem staffers and the Highway Patrol would not disclose the costs of the trooper’s travel and whether the state, the Noem campaign or the Trump campaign paid for the travel.

“The governor’s security is always state business, and we don’t comment on security," Noem's policy director, Maggie Seidel, said at the time. Noem’s spokesman Ian Fury would also not disclose the cost, citing security concerns.

The Journal sent a public records request on Nov. 4 to Fury and Highway Patrol spokesman Tony Mangan requesting they share how much the state paid for Noem’s travel and security during out-of-state travel from July 1 to Nov. 3. The request asked for an itemized breakdown of each trip, including travel location, dates, purpose of the travel, and the cost of security and travel paid by the state.

On Nov. 13 a Noem staffer approved the Journal’s request for some information on behalf of Katie Hruska, deputy general counsel to Noem. However, Hruska would not disclose information that they argued could endanger Noem. 

The email shared that Noem had one out-of-state trip for “official state business” to Washington, D.C., from July 21-23 for meetings related to the COVID-19 response. Her travel cost the state $1,101.16.

“The cost of that trip was paid by federal coronavirus relief funds received to the state, which include hotel, meals, and ground transportation for the governor,” Hruska wrote.

Hruska said she can't provide the cost of Noem's security detail, citing a law that says “public safety information that would create a substantial likelihood of endangering public safety or property, if disclosed" can't be shared. 

HB 1089 asks that “nothing in the section may be construed to exempt or restrict the full disclosure of direct and indirect expenditures, by any public entity, for the provision or security to the Governor or to any other state or public officials, including costs of meals, lodging, travel and compensation.”

Noem’s campaign stops for President Trump, other Republicans or political events include the following:

• Aug. 19: North Carolina for Dan Forest for Governor campaign

• Aug. 21: Montgomery County, Pennsylvania

• Sept. 4: Keynote speaker at Pottawattamie County Republican Party’s annual Lincoln-Reagan Dinner in Iowa

• Sept. 8: Ohio for Women for Trump event

• Sept. 17: Workers for Trump event in Shelby, Michigan

• Sept. 20: Nebraska

• Sept. 30: Shorewood, Minnesota

• Oct. 1: Sparta, Wisconsin

• Oct. 8-9: AMPFest in Miami, Florida

• Oct. 10-11: Women for Trump event in Hermantown, Minnesota, and other Minnesota towns

• Oct. 12: Marshall, Minnesota

• Oct. 13: Nebraska

• Oct. 15: New Hampshire

• Oct. 19: Dallas, Texas

• Oct. 19: Clay shoot and barbeque luncheon in Waukesha, Wisconsin

• Oct. 27: Trump rally in Omaha, Nebraska

• Oct. 28: New Hampshire and Maine

• Oct. 29-30: Mar-a-Lago Club, Palm Beach, Florida

• Dec. 6: Senate debate for run-off elections in Georgia, acting as a surrogate for Kelly Loeffler

We'll see how far this one travels.

Image: Blogger Joey DeVilla created the "Where in the World Is Kristi Noem" image.

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post. Those wishing to make a small ongoing monthly contribution should click on the  paypal subscription button.

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

NEW: I'm now on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

MN House passes resolution opposing violence, supporting democracy, some members pass

As in our usual practice, we watched the Minnesota House meet in session this afternoon.

In House passes resolution to ‘denounce violence’ and ‘support our democracy’, Mike Cook of Session Daily sums up the chamber's discussion:

The House voted Monday to express disdain with the Jan. 6 insurrection at the U.S. Capitol and support the 2020 certified election results.

Sponsored by Rep. Jamie Long (DFL-Mpls), HR1, in part, states the House of Representatives of the State of Minnesota:

• “condemns attacks on our democracy”;
• “unequivocally condemns violence directed at the United States Capitol and at state capitols”;
• resolves “that those who participated in the criminal destruction of property and assaults on our law enforcement officials at the United States Capitol should be arrested and prosecuted”;
• “stands behind the will of Minnesota voters and supports the full certification of its electoral college votes by the United States Congress”; and
• “reaffirms our commitment to democracy, free and fair elections, and the rule of law.”

Passed 111-8, the resolution will be entered in the House Journal.

“This resolution is an effort to come together in solidarity as one legislative body to denounce violence and to support our democracy,” Long said. “… We must be forthright in saying our democracy is sound, it is legitimate, it is strong, and threats against it cannot stand and will not succeed.”

“The votes and the voices based on the votes of our citizens and our residents should be heard and should be counted. No one should have any fear that their vote won’t be counted and no one should have any fear moving forward that those votes and their right to vote will be suppressed,” said Rep. Cedrick Frazier (DFL-New Hope).

No Republicans spoke in support of the resolution.

An amendment from Rep. Anne Neu Brindley (R-North Branch) to replace “condemns attacks on our democracy” with “condemns attacks on our constitutional republic” was narrowly rejected. . . .

Read the rest at Session Daily.

Majority Leader Ryan Winkler, DFL-Golden Valley, tweeted the DFL House Caucus statement about the resolution:

As a legislative body, the Minnesota House of Representatives has entered into the record our condemnation of an unprecedented attack on American democracy and the peaceful transfer of power. #mnleg pic.twitter.com/Jw6HWhUgH1

— Ryan Winkler (@_RyanWinkler) January 26, 2021

In an email of that statement, the resolution was included:

A House resolution condemning violence and violent rhetoric directed at our United States Capitol and state capitols, and affirming support for democracy, rule of law, and the certified results of Minnesota's election.

WHEREAS, on January 6, 2021, an armed mob breached the United States Capitol, endangering the safety of Members of Congress, law enforcement, and staff; and

WHEREAS, the mob damaged property in the United States Capitol and forced Members of Congress to evacuate, many wearing gas masks; and

WHEREAS, Capitol Police Officer Brian D. Sicknick was killed; and

WHEREAS, members of the mob breached and attempted to breach the chambers of the United States Senate and United States House of Representatives, minutes after Members of Congress evacuated; and

WHEREAS, pursuant to the 12th Amendment to the United States Constitution, the United States Congress was gathering in joint session to certify the Electoral College results; and

WHEREAS, the Electoral College has cast 306 electoral votes for Joe Biden to 232 electoral votes for President Donald Trump; and

WHEREAS, the electoral ballots had to be physically carried out of the chamber to prevent them from being damaged by the mob; and

WHEREAS, Minnesota's electoral votes had not yet been certified when Congress was forced to flee; and

WHEREAS, efforts to thwart the will of Minnesota voters are undemocratic; and

WHEREAS, attempts to block certification of Minnesota's election results have been rejected by the courts; and

WHEREAS, precautionary measures were required for the Minnesota State Capitol, including mobilizing law enforcement; NOW, THEREFORE,

BE IT RESOLVED by the House of Representatives of the State of Minnesota that it unequivocally condemns violence directed at the United States Capitol and at state capitols.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that those who participated in the criminal destruction of property and assaults on our law enforcement officials at the United States Capitol should be arrested and prosecuted.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the House of Representatives of the State of Minnesota stands behind the will of Minnesota voters and supports the full certification of its electoral college votes by the United States Congress.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the House of Representatives of the State of Minnesota condemns attacks on our democracy.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the House of Representatives of the State of Minnesota reaffirms our commitment to democracy, free and fair elections, and the rule of law.

We went through the Journal of the House to learn the precise count on the roll call on HR1 (beginning on near the bottom of page 204 through page 205) and found that Mekeland had voted no although his no vote does not appear on the board:

Hassan was excused for day. Journal of House records Mekeland as 8th no vote. 14 #mngop #mnhouse members--Albright, Boe, Erickson, Franson, Gruenhagen, Koznick, Lucero, McDonald, Miller, Mueller, Munson, Nash, Quam, Scott--pass. #mnleg https://t.co/ILNDzoXCUR

— Sally Jo Sorensen (@sallyjos) January 26, 2021

While there were many passionate remarks in the discussion, we were struck by one new member's response, who thoughtfully tweeted a video of his first floor remarks. 

First-term representative Cedrick Frazier, DFL-New Hope, tweeted a video of his floor remarks, which he framed around his grandfather's experience:

As we voted for a resolution condemning violence and affirming support for our democracy and free and fair elections, I couldn't help but think of my grandfather who grew up in the deep south and was 30 years old when the Voting Rights Act was passed. #mnleg pic.twitter.com/nZocPS2AN1

— Cedrick Frazier (@CedFrazierMN) January 26, 2021

Minneapolis DFLer Emma Greenman, another first year lawmaker, was more philosophical:

Today, I spoke for the first time on the #mnleg House floor, in favor of a resolution condemning attacks on the U.S. Capitol and our democracy. It matters that we stand up to defend our democracy, that we do it now, and that we do it together. https://t.co/PTh3ZIX3tk

— Emma Greenman (@emmagreenman) January 26, 2021

We'll post a link to the Minnesota House Information Services' YouTube of the debate after it is posted on the House channel.

Here it is:

Board screen shot: From Peter Callaghan's twitter feed.

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post. Those wishing to make a small ongoing monthly contribution should click on the  paypal subscription button.

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

NEW: I'm now on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

Can Swed, Dahms, local paper keep climate proposals with word "clean" in them straight?

Sometimes there are a lot of balls in the air at the Minnesota legislature, and it's difficult to follow along.

Take policies intended to address the climate emergency. A couple of areas were under scrutiny this past week--100 percent carbon-free electricity by 2040 by utilities and the proposed adoption of the so-called California clean car emission standards--got a couple of southwestern Minnesota state lawmakers mighty confused.

Or so a story in Saturday's Marshall Independent would imply.

On Thursday, the Office of the Governor issued the following press release, Governor Walz, Lieutenant Governor Flanagan, House and Senate DFL Energy Leads Announce Plan to Achieve 100 Percent Clean Energy in Minnesota by 2040 that included these details about the first subject:

.  .  .Governor Walz’s plan has four parts:

100 Percent Clean Energy by 2040. This standard would require all electric utilities in Minnesota to use only carbon-free energy resources by 2040, while setting interim goals along the way. It would also strengthen Minnesota’s renewable energy standard with new goals. The proposal includes provisions to assist workers and communities affected by the transition, while prioritizing local jobs and prevailing wages for large new clean energy projects.

Clean Energy First. This regulatory policy would require that, whenever a utility proposes to replace or add new power generation, it must prioritize energy efficiency and clean energy resources over fossil fuels. This policy would strengthen an existing renewable energy preference in Minnesota law, and it would allow for fossil fuel-based power only if needed to ensure reliable, affordable electricity.

Energy Optimization. This proposal would raise Minnesota’s Energy Efficiency Resource Standard for investor-owned electric utilities and expand the Conservation Improvement Program that helps Minnesota households and businesses save on their utility bills by using energy more efficiently. It would also encourage utilities to develop innovative new programs to help consumers and businesses switch to more efficient, cleaner energy. In addition, it would target more energy-saving assistance for low-income households.

Carbon Reduction Goals for Existing Buildings. This proposal would set a state goal of cutting greenhouse gas emissions from existing buildings in half by 2035.

These policies build on the success of Minnesota’s Next Generation Energy Act, passed in 2007 with near universal legislative support and signed into law by Gov. Tim Pawlenty. The law requires utilities to get at least 25 percent of their electricity from renewable energy sources by 2025.

Minnesota has already effectively achieved that standard. By the end of 2017, 25 percent of the electricity generated in Minnesota came from renewable sources, such as wind and solar. Meanwhile, electricity produced in the state from coal declined to 39 percent in 2017 from 59 percent in 2007.

The Next Generation Energy Act also set a goal of reducing the state’s greenhouse gas pollution by 15 percent by 2015 and 30 percent by 2025, from a 2005 base. As of 2016, greenhouse gas pollution from electricity had already declined about 29 percent since 2005.

The decrease is due to less coal and more clean energy being used to generate electricity in the state, as well as the positive impact of energy conservation measures. Several Minnesota utilities have already committed to additional coal plant closures that will further reduce greenhouse gas pollution produced by the electricity sector.

A draft of the as-yet-introduced House version of the bill (read it here) was up for discussion in the Minnesota House Climate and Energy Finance and Policy on Thursday. Representative Chris Swedzinski, R-Ghent, is the Republican lead of the committee.

Not that Swedzinski, R-Ghent, mentioned that in his Legislative Update to his constituents on Friday. Nope, it's the clean cars standards.

But the electricity generated proposals and the clean car standards are one and the same in the local newspaper today. 

The Marshall Independent reports in Swedzinski, Dahms criticize governor’s clean energy policy proposals:

Two southwest Minnesota lawmakers sharply criticized a set of clean energy policy proposals announced by Gov. Tim Walz and Lt. Gov. Peggy Flanagan on Thursday.

The Walz administration said the proposals will lead Minnesota to 100 percent clean energy in the state’s electricity sector by 2040. It also claimed that the policies build on the success that Minnesota has already achieved in reducing dependence on fossil fuels and increasing the use of clean energy resources to power the state while ensuring reliable, affordable electricity.

“The time to fight climate change is now,” Walz said. “Not only is clean energy the right and responsible choice for future generations, clean energy maximizes job creation and grows our economy, which is especially important as we work to recover from the COVID-19 pandemic. I am proud to announce a set of policy proposals that will lead Minnesota to 100% clean energy in the state’s electricity sector by 2040. Minnesotans have the ingenuity and innovation needed to power this future, and we are ready to pioneer the green energy economy.”

But State Sen. Gary Dahms, R-Redwood Falls, said the “proposed benefit” of the rules seems questionable based on data from Minnesota and across the nation. He said without adopting the standards, the Minnesota Department of Transportation’s (MnDOT’s) forecast shows that gasoline usage has already hit its peak and is projected to decline exponentially in the future. Also, he said states that have already adopted the standards have a smaller percentage of electric vehicles than Minnesota.  

On Wednesday, the Minnesota Senate’s Environment and Natural Resources Finance and Policy and Legacy Committees held a joint hearing regarding the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency’s (MPCA’s) intention to adopt California Emissions Standards through the administrative rulemaking process, bypassing the legislature.

Dahms, R-Redwood Falls, doesn't serve on either senate committee according to his official senate page.

The article in the Independent later reports:

“We must take immediate action to protect our earth for future generations,” Flanagan said. “Burning fossil fuels pollutes our environment, permanently changes our climate for the worse, and wastes money on inefficient and outdated practices. This plan sets a clear path and destination for Minnesota’s clean energy future. Minnesota should be a state that continues to lead on the clean energy economy, and we know we can.”

Swedzinski criticized the proposals after the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency conducted its first public information session last week regarding the agency’s intention to adopt the California Cars Standard through the administrative rule making process.

“It makes no sense whatsoever for Minnesota to make itself subject to California bureaucrats 1,700 miles away,” Swedzinski said. He is the lead Republican on the House Climate and Energy Finance and Policy Committee.

“This is an effort by the governor to bypass the Legislature and once again push a metro-centric agenda on all of Minnesota. Adopting California’s auto standards would drive up the cost of cars and limit access to the vehicles Minnesotans want, especially trucks and SUVs.

“If the governor wants to encourage people to purchase electric vehicles, a better plan would be to increase demand by supporting policies to reduce consumer prices. It is the wrong approach for our governor to impose his will on Minnesota auto dealers and consumers and you can’t help but wonder what what he and his administration will go after next. Now it’s cars, but next is it semi-trucks, tractors, fishing boats, lawnmowers or snowblowers? This isn’t leadership, it’s catering to metro-based environmentalists at the expense of those of us in Greater Minnesota.”

Yep, if Walz is talking about carbon-free electricity generation, next thing you know, Peggy Flanagan is after your lawnmower. 

Bluestem posted Minnesota House climate & energy committee considers “100% Clean Energy Standard” about the energy standard addressed to utilities, which we do not believe can be confused with snowblowers.

The post is largely House climate panel considers quickening push to carbon-free energy by Rob Hubbard at Session Daily:

Completely carbon-free by 2040. That’s the goal of the “100% Clean Energy Standard” the House Climate and Energy Finance and Policy Committee contemplated Thursday. It would require that all of a utility’s electric power should come from carbon-free resources by 2040.

The concept has not been officially introduced as a bill, but its sponsor, Rep. Jamie Long (DFL-Mpls), the committee chair, wanted to have a discussion of its merits at an informational hearing before formally presenting it next Thursday. And the meeting certainly inspired debate, as 28 testifiers offered opinions. Most were favorable, but utilities and environmentalists expressed reservations.

A standard would be established for all utilities to supply customers with electricity generated from carbon-free resources, beginning at 65% in 2025 and increasing every five years to reach 100% in 2040.

Under the plan, the Public Utilities Commission would expand its view of net benefits to include those pertaining to labor, environmental justice and low-income populations. It would encourage the location of new generating facilities in communities that are losing generating facilities that use fossil fuels. And it would allow the commission to require prevailing wage for workers constructing wind and solar facilities.

Grace Arnold, interim commerce commissioner, emphasized job creation and opportune timing.

“Already, about 60,000 Minnesotans work in clean energy, most of them in rural Minnesota,” she said. “And, in the next two decades, about 70% of the state’s power plants are up for retirement.”

Amol Phadke, deputy of the International Energy Analysis Department, Energy Analysis and Environmental Impacts Division at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, has led studies on transitions to renewable energy sources. He commended Minnesota for its moves in that direction.

“It’s important to act on climate change, but it’s also the best economic choice,” he said. “Clean energy costs have fallen much more quickly than anyone predicted. … One of the main criticisms of going clean was the cost to consumers. But the cost is now actually 10% lower than for non-renewable energy sources. … If we let the technologies compete with each other, we can reach 90% by 2035 nationally. And Minnesota does even better because of its significant wind resources.”

Cited by Rep. Glenn Gruenhagen (R-Glencoe) and a few skeptical testifiers were the blackouts experienced in California last summer, inspiring questions about whether the grid will be reliable enough with entirely carbon-free energy sources.

Phadke responded that the blackouts in his state were chiefly due to natural gas plants not coming online, and Steve Jorissen of Northeast Metro Climate Action added that Texas is the largest user of renewable energy and that it doesn’t have blackout problems.

The chief objections to the bill came from testifiers representing utilities, who found the mandates too inflexible about what kind of carbon-free energy sources to use.

“Legal mandates that come forward may do more to inhibit than enhance,” said Rick Evans, Xcel Energy’s director of regional governmental affairs, adding that new clean energy technologies may emerge that aren’t addressed in the plan.

While, overall, the proposal received good reviews from representatives of environmental organizations, concerns were expressed that waste incineration would continue to be allowed. More than one said that such plants have been proven toxic to nearby residents.

In a release Thursday, Gov. Tim Walz endorsed the idea and said his administration has three more proposals coming regarding clean energy. The others will concern prioritizing clean energy resources over fossil fuels when replacing power plants; raising standards for energy efficiency; and cutting greenhouse gas emissions from existing buildings in half by 2035.

Was Swedzinski trying to change the subject to criticism of the clean car standards, which Minnesota Republicans seem to believe is a winning talking point?

He is, after all, the lead on the committee that had a first peak at the 100 percent carbon-free electricity standards on Thursday.

The Senate seems serious, Ricardo Lopez reports for the Minnesota Reformer in Senate GOP leader says MPCA commissioner could face removal over proposed clean-car rule:

Senate Majority Leader Paul Gazelka, R-East Gull Lake, on Friday signaled that if the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency presses ahead with its implementation of a new car emission standard modeled after California, the Senate may remove Laura Bishop as commissioner of the agency. 

The MPCA last month proposed a rule that would require automakers to increase the number of electric vehicles they deliver to Minnesota auto dealers, drawing strong criticism from Republican lawmakers. 

The Minnesota Senate, led by Republicans, has pushed back against the rule change, saying it would drive up costs on all cars sold in the state. They also say electric vehicles would fare poorly in Minnesota’s cold winters. . . .

The car emission standard has also received praise from Consumer Reports, a consumer advocacy nonprofit that publishes product testing reviews and investigates consumer safety issues.

“Consumer Reports supports state adoption of low and zero emission standards because they save drivers money on fuel, improve the kinds of vehicles consumers already like to drive, and increase buying options for consumers at their local car dealerships,” the publication wrote in 2019.

Read the rule and the process of rule adoption here at the agency's website.

Read more about the other issue in the Star Tribune in Gov. Tim Walz pushes again for carbon-free electricity in Minnesota to avert climate crisis.

Let's hope Dahms, Swedinski and the Marshall Independent can work to better inform the lawmaker's constituents and the paper's readers about both proposals. 

Photo: Xcel's Sherco coal-fired electricity generating power plant, which the utility plans to close in 2030.

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post. Those wishing to make a small ongoing monthly contribution should click on the  paypal subscription button.

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

NEW: I'm now on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

Environment committee approves 2020 lands bill

We're looking into a couple of deep dive stories on a couple of topics, but haven't completed the investigations, so our posts today will be articles available for reprinting from other sources.

Another article from Session Daily:

Environment committee approves 2020 lands bill

By Nate Gotlieb

The Department of Natural Resources may be able to grant easement rights to federally recognized American Indian tribes for trails, highways, flood control and more under a provision of the department’s annual “lands bill.”

HF133 was approved Tuesday by the House Environment and Natural Resources Finance and Policy Committee and referred to the House Ways and Means Committee.

The bill was originally presented in the 2020 legislative session but stalled because of the COVID-19 pandemic, said Rep. Jamie Becker-Finn (DFL-Roseville), the bill sponsor.

There is currently no Senate companion, but a nearly identical version was introduced last year by Sen. Carrie Ruud (R-Breezy Point).

The bill would allow the department to charge a "monitoring fee" to entities that lease state land to build a trail or facility, in addition to allowing the DNR to convey easements to American Indian tribes. It would also add and/or remove land from several state parks and recreation areas and allow for the private sale of surplus state land and tax-forfeited lands in Cass, Lake of the Woods, St. Louis and Wadena counties.

Rep. Steve Green (R-Fosston), the lone vote against the bill, said he'd like to see more desirable properties offered up for sale.

Watch the hearing here:

Photo: Random outdoor Minnesota photo of trail that's not funded by this bill. 

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post. Those wishing to make a small ongoing monthly contribution should click on the  paypal subscription button.

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

NEW: I'm now on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

Minnesota legislature looking to spend more on reliable broadband connections in rural areas

We're looking into a couple of deep dive stories on a couple of topics, but haven't completed the investigations, so our posts today will be articles available for reprinting from other sources.

From Session Daily:

Greater MN seeking more funding for broadband connections in rural areas

By Tim Walker

The COVID-19 pandemic has brought into sharp focus the need for speedy and stable internet connections, which allow students to learn remotely and patients to visit with doctors using telemedicine technology, among other things.

But not all parts of the state have equal access to those options due to poor or no broadband internet connections, Rep. Rob Ecklund (DFL-International Falls) told the House Industrial Education and Economic Development Finance and Policy Committee Wednesday.

“Thankfully, this is a problem we know how to solve,” Ecklund said.

He sponsors HF14, which would add $120 million in the 2022-23 biennium to the state border-to-border broadband account. The influx would be used to increase high-speed broadband internet service in unserved and underserved areas of the state.

Ecklund said the stories of students sitting in their cars outside businesses to access Wi-Fi services are true, adding that he was participating in the remote committee hearing in a rented commercial office because the internet connection from his International Falls home is too poor to support a video connection.

No action was taken on the bill, but Rep. Gene Pelowski Jr. (DFL-Winona), the committee chair, wants to have further discussion on the proposal after more is known about how $300 million coming from the federal government will be distributed to the states and what kinds of strings are attached to those funds.

The companion, SF22, is sponsored by Sen. Tom Bakk (I-Cook) and awaits action by the Senate Agriculture and Rural Development Finance and Policy Committee.

Funds in the Border-to-Border Broadband Development Grant Program, established by the Legislature in 2014, are used primarily for grants to acquire and install middle- and last-mile infrastructure for high-speed broadband internet service in unserved and underserved areas. The border-to-border broadband fund account previously received fiscal year funding of $10.6 million in 2016, $35 million in 2017, $20 million in 2018, $20 million in 2020, and $20 million in 2021.

The state has short- and long-term goals for expanding broadband access in the state, said Angie Dickison, executive director of the Office of Broadband Development in the Department of Employment and Economic Development.

Dickison said the first goal is that by 2022, all Minnesota businesses and homes will have access to high-speed broadband that provides minimum download speeds of at least 25 megabits per second and minimum upload speeds of at least three megabits per second.

The second goal is that by 2026, all Minnesota businesses and homes will have access to at least one provider of broadband with download speeds of at least 100 megabits per second and upload speeds of at least 20 megabits per second.

Although we are making good progress toward those goals, Dickison said, a lot of work remains to get broadband coverage to all corners of the state.

During her presentation, Dickison reported that 92% of the overall 2020 goal has been achieved; however, for rural areas of the state that percentage drops to 83%.

Here's the Minnesota House Information Services YouTube:

Map graphic: HF14 would add $120 million in the 2022-23 biennium to the state border-to-border broadband account to increase high-speed internet service in underserved areas of the state. Screenshot of Department of Employment and Economic Development graphic.

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post. Those wishing to make a small ongoing monthly contribution should click on the  paypal subscription button.

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

NEW: I'm now on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

Minnesota House climate & energy committee considers “100% Clean Energy Standard”

We're looking into a couple of deep dive stories on a couple of topics, but haven't completed the investigations, so our posts today will be articles available for reprinting from other sources.

From Session Daily:

House climate panel considers quickening push to carbon-free energy

By Rob Hubbard

Completely carbon-free by 2040. That’s the goal of the “100% Clean Energy Standard” the House Climate and Energy Finance and Policy Committee contemplated Thursday. It would require that all of a utility’s electric power should come from carbon-free resources by 2040.

The concept has not been officially introduced as a bill, but its sponsor, Rep. Jamie Long (DFL-Mpls), the committee chair, wanted to have a discussion of its merits at an informational hearing before formally presenting it next Thursday. And the meeting certainly inspired debate, as 28 testifiers offered opinions. Most were favorable, but utilities and environmentalists expressed reservations.

A standard would be established for all utilities to supply customers with electricity generated from carbon-free resources, beginning at 65% in 2025 and increasing every five years to reach 100% in 2040.

Under the plan, the Public Utilities Commission would expand its view of net benefits to include those pertaining to labor, environmental justice and low-income populations. It would encourage the location of new generating facilities in communities that are losing generating facilities that use fossil fuels. And it would allow the commission to require prevailing wage for workers constructing wind and solar facilities.

Grace Arnold, interim commerce commissioner, emphasized job creation and opportune timing.

“Already, about 60,000 Minnesotans work in clean energy, most of them in rural Minnesota,” she said. “And, in the next two decades, about 70% of the state’s power plants are up for retirement.”

Amol Phadke, deputy of the International Energy Analysis Department, Energy Analysis and Environmental Impacts Division at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, has led studies on transitions to renewable energy sources. He commended Minnesota for its moves in that direction.

“It’s important to act on climate change, but it’s also the best economic choice,” he said. “Clean energy costs have fallen much more quickly than anyone predicted. … One of the main criticisms of going clean was the cost to consumers. But the cost is now actually 10% lower than for non-renewable energy sources. … If we let the technologies compete with each other, we can reach 90% by 2035 nationally. And Minnesota does even better because of its significant wind resources.”

Cited by Rep. Glenn Gruenhagen (R-Glencoe) and a few skeptical testifiers were the blackouts experienced in California last summer, inspiring questions about whether the grid will be reliable enough with entirely carbon-free energy sources.

Phadke responded that the blackouts in his state were chiefly due to natural gas plants not coming online, and Steve Jorissen of Northeast Metro Climate Action added that Texas is the largest user of renewable energy and that it doesn’t have blackout problems.

The chief objections to the bill came from testifiers representing utilities, who found the mandates too inflexible about what kind of carbon-free energy sources to use.

“Legal mandates that come forward may do more to inhibit than enhance,” said Rick Evans, Xcel Energy’s director of regional governmental affairs, adding that new clean energy technologies may emerge that aren’t addressed in the plan.

While, overall, the proposal received good reviews from representatives of environmental organizations, concerns were expressed that waste incineration would continue to be allowed. More than one said that such plants have been proven toxic to nearby residents.

In a release Thursday, Gov. Tim Walz endorsed the idea and said his administration has three more proposals coming regarding clean energy. The others will concern prioritizing clean energy resources over fossil fuels when replacing power plants; raising standards for energy efficiency; and cutting greenhouse gas emissions from existing buildings in half by 2035.

Here's the YouTube of the hearing:

Photo: A wind turbine under construction. Minnesota House Information Services file photo.

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post. Those wishing to make a small ongoing monthly contribution should click on the  paypal subscription button.

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

NEW: I'm now on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

 

States attorneys looking into killing of Joseph Boever by AG Ravnsborg not talking to Noem

We've been following the story of the killing months ago of Joseph Boever by a distracted driver, South Dakota Attorney General Jason Ravnsborg.

For Thursday's Sioux Falls Argus Leader, Jonathan Ellis reports in Noem: States attorneys investigating Ravnsborg incident giving her 'no answers':

Gov. Kristi Noem said Thursday that a group of states attorneys who have been handling the investigation into a fatal accident involving Attorney General Jason Ravnsborg have not responded to her administration's request for the status of the investigation.

"We make inquiries on a regular basis and have gotten no answers," Noem said during a press conference in which the Argus Leader asked about the Sept. 12 accident that resulted in the death of Joseph Boever.

Noem added that it was a "grave disservice" to Boever's family, echoing comments she made a month ago about a lack of action in the matter. She said she was "disappointed" and hoped the state's attorneys, led by Hyde County Deputy State Attorney Emily Sovell, would quickly conclude their investigation. Sovell has refused to communicate with the media about the investigation. . . .

Read the rest in the Argus Leader.

Related posts:

• Rapid City Journal: After 4 months, still no decision on whether AG Ravnsborg will be charged for killing Joseph Boever
•  AP: Prosecutors waiting on debris testing in SD Attorney General killing of Joseph Boever 
•  Governor Kristi Noem takes off her positive pants, given pace of Ravnsborg investigation

Photo: Joseph Boever, left, was killed while walking on the shoulder of a road, while carrying a light, when a distracted Jason Ravnsborg, right, was distracted while driving and his car drifted onto the shoulder where Boever walking.

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post. Those wishing to make a small ongoing monthly contribution should click on the  paypal subscription button.

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

NEW: I'm now on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

Update: SD tribes, MNHouse indigenous members praise Keystone XL cancellation

On Wednesday, we posted Missing from AP report on Biden's revoking Keystone XL pipeline: indigenous voices. 

That news is now available. In the Sioux Falls Argus Leader, Danielle Ferguson reports in South Dakota tribes applaud cancellation of Keystone XL Pipeline, Thune decries 'bad decision':

Tribal leaders in South Dakota are applauding President Joe Biden's day one move to halt the Keystone XL Pipeline at the country's northern border, calling the action a willingness to listen to Native American voices. 

Tribes in South Dakota have been opposed to and protesting the pipeline's construction for more than a decade. Biden canceled its permit as part of a number of promises to address climate change.

President of the Oglala Lakota Nation, Kevin Killer, said Wednesday night the cancellation of the pipeline permit “sends a strong message to tribal nations, and symbolizes a willingness to build on government-to-government relationships established through our treaties,” referencing the 1851 and 1868 Fort Laramie treaties of the Great Sioux Nation.

Chairman of the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe Harold Frazier said the project posed a danger to tribal land and people. 

“This project has scarred our territorial and treaty lands with its presence and threatened our people like a dagger to our throats,” Frazier wrote Wednesday night. “We have witnessed the invasion of our land and the genocide of our families – this project is an extension of the racial, environmental and social injustices we have suffered." . . .

Read the rest in the Argus Leader.

In Minnesota, two Indigenous Minnesota House members released this statement, Lawmakers Support Biden Decision to Halt Keystone XL Pipeline:

Yesterday, on his first day in office, President Joe Biden cancelled the cross-border permit for the Keystone XL pipeline, effectively halting its development. Representatives Jamie Becker-Finn (DFL – Roseville) and Heather Keeler (DFL – Moorhead), released the following statement in support of this decision, with several House colleagues joining in solidarity:

“First and foremost, we would like to thank President Biden for taking this important proactive step towards addressing climate impacts and hearing the voices of the people over the demands of international oil companies. This is great news for our nation's environment, Indigenous rights, and landowners located along the pipeline’s route.
The Keystone XL project holds many key similarities with Enbridge’s Line 3 and the Dakota Access Pipeline projects. Like Keystone, Line 3 and Dakota Access would endanger our valuable water resources, cause irrevocable harm to our climate, and have been pushed forward despite opposition from impacted tribal communities. As a state and nation, we must strive for a green energy future and make decisive steps to address the harm to our environment perpetuated by the fossil fuel industry. It is our hope that the Biden-Harris administration will continue to listen to the voices of the millions of Americans who see addressing climate change as a top priority.”

The Keystone XL pipeline was first proposed 15 years ago and was expected to carry 830,000 barrels of dirty tar sand oil per day through Canada and the United States. Similar to other pipeline projects, it has been plagued by controversy and numerous lawsuits from the start. President Obama rejected the permit in 2015, but the right of way was later granted by President Trump. 

Representatives Patty Acomb (District 44B), Esther Agbaje (District 59B), Kaela Berg (District 56B), Liz Boldon (District 25B), Jim Davnie (District 63A), Sandra Feist (District 41B), Cedrick Frazier (District 45A), Peter Fischer (District 43A), Aisha Gomez (District 62B), Emma Greenman (District 63B), Jessica Hanson (District 56A), Hodan Hassan (District 62A), Alice Hausman (District 66A), Sydney Jordan (District 60A), Kaohly Her (District 64A), Athena Hollins (District 66B), Frank Hornstein (District 61A), Fue Lee (District 59A), Todd Lippert (District 20A), Jamie Long (District 61B), Sandra Masin (District 51A), Carlos Mariani (District 65B), Rena Moran (District 65A), Kelly Morrison (District 33B), Liz Reyer (District 51B), Ruth Richardson (District 52B), John Thompson (District 67A), Samantha Vang (District 40B), and Jay Xiong (District 67B) join in solidarity with this statement.

Becker-Finn is a Leech Lake Ojibwe descendant, while Keeler is a member of the Yankton Sioux Tribe.

The statement notes:

The Keystone XL project holds many key similarities with Enbridge’s Line 3 and the Dakota Access Pipeline projects. Like Keystone, Line 3 and Dakota Access would endanger our valuable water resources, cause irrevocable harm to our climate, and have been pushed forward despite opposition from impacted tribal communities.

That brings us to another story related to Indian country. 

For the Star Tribune, Patrick Condon reports in Minnesota tribes blast Rep. Pete Stauber for opposing Interior nomination:

Leaders of Minnesota's biggest American Indian tribes are criticizing U.S. Rep. Pete Stauber for his efforts to build opposition to President Joe Biden's pick for Interior secretary, who is herself a tribal member.

Most egregiously, state tribal leaders said, Stauber — a Republican whose northeastern Minnesota district is home to several of the state's largest bands — did not even give them a heads-up that he would be trying to sink the nomination of Democratic Rep. Deb Haaland of New Mexico to lead the Department of the Interior.

"We felt like we were blindsided," Faron Jackson Sr., chairman of the Leech Lake Band of Ojibwe, said Thursday. "You know, we might not change his opinion or his outlook, but at least give us the consultation."

Several groups of tribal leaders sent blistering letters to Stauber last week after learning that he had been reaching out to House colleagues seeking co-signers for a letter to the new Biden administration asking that Haaland's name be withdrawn from consideration. . . . 

Minnesota tribes have raised concerns about several high-profile mining and pipeline projects in northern Minnesota, while Stauber has been an outspoken proponent.

"We want to make sure we're protecting our clean water, our forests, our air," Jackson said. "We're caretakers of the Earth here, and we want to look at different avenues for producing energy."

In a separate letter to Stauber about his opposition to Haaland, Mille Lacs Band of Ojibwe Chief Executive Melanie Benjamin pushed back at Stauber's argument that policies championed by Haaland would be bad for jobs in his district.

"Collectively, the five tribal governments in your district are the largest employees in the 8th District and the vast majority of jobs we have created are held by non-Native people," she wrote.

Tribal leaders noted particular disappointment in Stauber given his membership on the House Subcommittee for Indigenous Peoples. Haaland has also been a member.

"Your opposition to the first and only American Indian ever nominated to a Cabinet position is likely to reverberate across Indian country," wrote the leaders of the Mille Lacs Band of Ojibwe, the Grand Portage Band of Superior Chippewa, the Leech Lake Band of Ojibwe, the Bois Forte Band of Chippewa and the Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa. 

We'll keep an eye out for additional developments.

Map: The Keystone XL pipeline route.

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post. Those wishing to make a small ongoing monthly contribution should click on the  paypal subscription button.

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

NEW: I'm now on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

[VIDEO] MN Reformer: Newbie Erik Mortensen jokes about getting HR complaint on first day

Freshman House New Republican state representatiive Erik Mortensen, Shakopee, has captured our attention in the past, making an appearance in our posts:

MN55A: Mortensen deletes fake news about Tabke's views after area hunter calls him out

Newest New House Republican to hold back yard party in Shakopee, invites Walz and Ellison

Letter: MN Attorney General Keith Ellison declines invitation to Erik Mortensen's party

He's a real pip, that one. Now Deena Winter's got a scoop at the Minnesota Reformer.

The story follows the Facebook video embedded below, of the Action 4 Liberty Facebook interview that's at the core of the story. Should it be deleted, we did have a friend save a copy for us. Action 4 Liberty is conservative political organization with the stated mission to "protect liberty for the next generation" and such.

Its political action committee, Action 4 Liberty PAC, raised $41,500.00 in 2018, $30,000 of which came from conservative west metro ATM Robert Cummins; it contributed $1,000.00 to Mortensen's 2018 campaign.  In 2019, the PAC gave $1000 to Mortensen's committee. No contributions to Mortensen's committee were reported in the group's 2020 pre-general election report.

Freshman Shakopee lawmaker jokes about getting HR complaint on first day

By Deena Winter January 21, 2021

Minnesota Reformer

Minnesota Rep. Erik Mortensen, R-Shakopee, has already attracted considerable attention for a pandemic tour of Minnesota restaurants that stayed open in defiance of the executive orders of Gov. Tim Walz.

Now, in his first few weeks in the Legislature, he’s moved on to new provocations, drawing a human resource complaint for abusive language. He recently joked about getting an “HR complaint” on his first day on the floor of the House. He also laughed at a right-wing show host’s suggestion that government workers be “hanged” for enforcing Walz’s COVID-19 restrictions.

On a videotaped show called Action 4 Liberty  host Jake Duesenberg asked Mortensen, a freshman, “Did I hear right? Did you already get a complaint with HR on you?”

Mortensen laughed and said someone complained to House human resources because of how he spoke to House Speaker Melissa Hortman and a House aide at the dais. He didn’t share what he said.

Duesenberg replied that nobody cares because lawmakers have such low approval ratings, “so no one’s crying for them when you’re hurting somebody’s feelings.”

Multiple people have lectured Mortensen for going against the institution’s culture, he said. But he’s more convinced than ever that the system is so broken that “it’s going to take a very different approach to get anything done,” he said.

Hortman did not respond to a request for comment, and a spokesperson for Hortman said “I am not able to disclose or discuss the existence of any complaints, or their status.”

Later in the Action 4 Liberty interview, Mortensen talked about his bill that would make it a felony for a government agency to threaten to pull a business license for not complying with the governor’s executive orders, such as pandemic shutdown orders.

The host asked “Why can’t we just hang ‘em?”

Mortensen laughed and added, “I should send that to the House research staff to see what they say about that.”

When a listener suggested a firing squad instead, Mortensen laughed again.

Mortensen does not appear to have introduced such a bill yet, although he has introduced legislation that would suspend the salaries of the governor or state legislators when there is a peacetime emergency that restricts the operation of private businesses.

Mortensen made headlines before he even took office when he invited the attorney general and governor to a pandemic-defying party. He narrowly won his seat over Democratic-Farmer-Labor Rep. Brad Tabke with the help of a potential pot party spoiler.

If you like the story, consider making a donation to the Minnesota Reformer.

Photo: State representative Erik Mortensen.

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post. Those wishing to make a small ongoing monthly contribution should click on the  paypal subscription button.

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

NEW: I'm now on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

Missing from AP report on Biden's revoking Keystone XL pipeline: indigenous voices

Via the Sioux Falls Argus Leader, the Associated Press's Rob Gillies reports in Keystone XL pipeline halted as Biden moves to cancel permit:

Construction on the long disputed Keystone XL oil pipeline halted Wednesday in anticipation of incoming U.S. President Joe Biden revoking its permit.

Biden’s Day One plans includes moving to revoke a presidential permit for the pipeline.

The 1,700-mile (2,735-kilometer) pipeline was planned to carry roughly 800,000 barrels of oil a day from Alberta to the Texas Gulf Coast, passing through Montana, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas and Oklahoma. . . .

First proposed in 2008, the pipeline has become emblematic of the tensions between economic development and curbing the fossil fuel emissions that are causing climate change. The Obama administration rejected it, but President Donald Trump revived it and has been a strong supporter. Construction already started. . . .

Environmental groups applauded Biden’s move.

“Killing the Keystone XL pipeline once and for all is a clear indication that climate action is a priority for the White House,” said Dale Marshall, national climate program manager for Canada’s Environmental Defence.

The article reports on opposition to Biden's decision on the part of Canadian national and provincial officials, U.S. Chamber of Commerce's Global Energy Institute, and TCEnergy's Keystone XL President Richard Prior.

No mention, however, of indigenous Americans' leadership in the opposition to the project.

To fill in that blank, we turn to an abundance of sources.

We received this statement from the South Dakota ACLU:

Today, President Joe Biden signed an executive order rescinding a key permit for the Keystone XL pipeline, effectively killing the project.

The following is a statement from Candi Brings Plenty, the ACLU of South Dakota’s Indigenous justice organizer:

“We recognize that Indigenous people have been at the forefront of the fight for environmental justice and protection. Tribal nations and communities are battling every day for the protection of their homelands and survival of ecosystems and ways of life. Construction of the Keystone XL pipeline or a spill from the project would cause irreparable and devastating impact to local communities and ecosystems.

“That’s why the ACLU of South Dakota supported water protectors our Indigenous partners and their right to protest the pipeline. It’s why we challenged the “riot boosting act” in court in 2019 and opposed similar legislation in 2020 – both unnecessary efforts to legislative peaceful protest in South Dakota that were sparked by a desire to suppress protests around the Keystone XL pipeline. The right to join with fellow citizens in protest or peaceful assembly is critical to a functioning democracy and at the core of the First Amendment. Hearing that President Biden canceled the Keystone XL permit is welcome news.”

Some tweets from indigenous writers, leaders and activists. This sampling is by no means exhaustive, but a taste of what is a BFD in Indian country.

Update January 21

Huge victory yesterday for Rosebud Sioux Tribe, the Aaniiih Nation and the Assiniboine Tribe. Thank you @POTUS @JoeBiden for stopping KXL. Now let’s keep it going, next on the list: Dakota Access Pipeline. #NoDAPL

— Standing Rock Sioux Tribe (@StandingRockST) January 21, 2021

Id like to give a shout out to @Wizipan of @sicangucorp for his contributions to defeat KXL!

In 2014 he risked arrest along w/ ally farmer Art Tanderup raising awareness about KXL's water impacts. Follow @sicangucorp for amazing work. pic.twitter.com/35S7eKH2zh

— Dallas Goldtooth (@dallasgoldtooth) January 21, 2021

[end update]

pic.twitter.com/Bt5L8sn8PR

— Remi Bald Eagle (@RemiBald) January 20, 2021

BREAKING: In a big win for tribal sovereignty and Native peoples, Biden administration revokes illegal KeystoneXL (KXL) permit. #HonorTheTreaties #NoKXL Learn more at https://t.co/mPnhgeCF6c pic.twitter.com/4ON4T2MYw4

— NARF (@NDNrights) January 20, 2021

I cut my organizer teeth on the #NoKXL fight. And I reflect on the many warriors who led this fight who are no longer with us.

We honor them.

Deb White Plume
Pat Spears
Bob Gough
Tom Poor Bear

RIP

— Dallas Goldtooth (@dallasgoldtooth) January 21, 2021

President Biden is signing an Executive Order today that will put an end to the Keystone XL pipeline.

I’m sharing a few of the pieces I wrote re #NoKXL that shows how long my people have been fighting it. Water the Life giver was published by Indian Country Today in 2011. pic.twitter.com/xKTrOGlGl3

— Ruth H. Hopkins, B.S., M.S., J.D. (@Ruth_HHopkins) January 20, 2021

THE KEYSTONE XL PIPELINE PERMIT IS OFFICIALLY CANCELLED. Today, President Biden rescinded the Keystone XL pipeline permit by executive order, fulfilling one of his campaign promises. We honor the role Native leaders and organizers played in securing this victory. pic.twitter.com/mO8mqB1uiS

— IllumiNative (@_IllumiNatives) January 20, 2021

For over 10 yrs the people came together and resisted #KeystoneXL in order protect land, water, climate and our rights. Today, President Biden signed the Executive Order but we wouldn't have had TWO victories in ending this destructive pipeline w/o Indigenous leadership. pic.twitter.com/H3OUeAjQzj

— NDN Collective (@ndncollective) January 21, 2021

KXL IS DEAD! We celebrate this as a win for the countless native ppls & allies who held the line for over 10 years!

But it is not a complete victory while oil still flows in #DAPL & ppl are getting arrested against #Line3. IEN's full statement: https://t.co/S6oM7mzLUK

— Indigenous Environmental Network (@IENearth) January 20, 2021

Help amplify Indigenous voices demanding further action from @JoeBiden to #StopLine3 and #NoDAPL.

HERE ARE SOME TOOLKITS made by:@IENearth: https://t.co/x9ltlEBgrz@StandingRockST: https://t.co/WK3aIr2N8E@GiniwCollective: https://t.co/giyh8jirgq

— Indigenous Environmental Network (@IENearth) January 20, 2021

Almost four years ago Native people marched down Pennsylvania Ave, all the way to the White House, to demand to be heard by someone who didn’t listen. Today the street is mostly empty as Indian Country awaits President Joe Biden’s first actions. #NativeNationsRise #NoDAPL #NoKXL pic.twitter.com/aWiLcQaswG

— indianz.com (@indianz) January 20, 2021

The new president ordered a temporary moratorium on new oil and gas leasing in the Arctic wilderness and began revoking Trump's approval for the Keystone XL pipeline. https://t.co/4FWkuTjg24

— Indian Country Today (@IndianCountry) January 21, 2021

My KXL reaction/thoughts #NoKXL #BuildBackFossilFree https://t.co/pHpNe1ZFHF

— Dallas Goldtooth (@dallasgoldtooth) January 21, 2021

The project was also the impetus for Governor Kristi Noem's anti-First Amendment "Riot Boosting" law, which was laughed out of federal court.

Related posts:

•  Judge stops bid to end Rosebud Sioux & Fort Belknap Indian tribes' Keystone pipeline lawsuit 
• Keystone pipeline leaks again--this time in ND
• More land affected by Keystone leak than first thought; congressmen seek pipeline review 
• TransCanada's risk assessment estimated tiny spills "no more than once every 41 years” in SD
• SD Gov Noem blames Soros' money for pipeline protests; cuts tribes out of anti-protest bills talk

Map: From Biden's planned Keystone XL cancellation welcomed by NDP, Green leaders | CBC News. We grew especially concerned with the project when the existing pipeline (blue) which runs near the historical boundary of the Lake Traverse Reservation, home of the Sisseton Wahpeton Oyate Dakota, leaked in fall of 2017 near Amherst, South Dakota.  

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post. Those wishing to make a small ongoing monthly contribution should click on the  paypal subscription button.

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

NEW: I'm now on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

SD News Watch: Lawmakers off to slow start in regulating legal weed, but industry ramping up

This story is a bit old, but still worth a read.

By Nick Lowrey
From South Dakota News Watch
Used with permission.

Entrepreneurs across South Dakota are already taking steps to claim a share of the state’s soon-to-be-legal marijuana market, but legislators and regulators are off to a slow start in crafting laws and rules to govern the controversial new industry. 

The sale, possession and use of recreational and medicinal marijuana are set to become legal in South Dakota for the first time on July 1. But when the 2021 South Dakota legislative session started on Jan. 12, only one bill regarding marijuana had been filed.

A group of 15 Republican lawmakers have formed what they call a “Cannabis Caucus” to address marijuana issues this session. But leaders in both the Republican and Democratic parties say discussions on preparing for legalization and regulation of the business of marijuana sales, possession and use — one of the top matters facing the 2021 Legislature — have barely begun.

One high-ranking Senate leader said enacting a regulatory framework for legal marijuana will probably require more than one session of work and will likely spill into the 2022 session or require a special session to complete. 

“Not everything will be done at the end of this session,” said Senate Majority Leader Gary Cammack, R-Union Center. “I know there has been talk about the need for a special session.”

Marijuana entrepreneurs, however, are not waiting for the Legislature to act. Many have been working for months to get businesses ready for the July 1 legalization date. The South Dakota Secretary of State’s Office handled 907 more new business filings during the last three months of 2020 than it had during the same period of 2019, many of them related to legal weed. 

Exactly how many new business filings are related to marijuana is unknown, as the Secretary of State’s Office does not require new businesses to indicate a purpose or sales plan, said Jason Luntz, deputy secretary of state. 

But as of Jan. 11, a search of public business filings on the Secretary of State’s website found more than 40 businesses with the words “cannabis,” “marijuana,” “pot” or “dispensary” in their names. Most of those businesses organized as Limited Liability Companies or registered their business names after voters approved marijuana legalization on Nov. 3, 2020.

Even as a court challenge of the legalization of recreational marijuana remains unresolved, experts say the state needs to move quickly to establish clear rules for growing and selling marijuana commercially. The state will need to license and regulate sales outlets, set up tax collections, define penalties for selling marijuana to minors and make laws related to the marijuana black market, said Kittrick Jeffries, a former marijuana industry compliance officer and founder of a new Rapid City-based cannabis consulting firm called Dakota Cannabis Consulting.

“I think South Dakota has a great opportunity here … but there are some really key things that need to be done before July,” Jeffries said.

If lawmakers and state regulators do not have the framework of a commercial market in place before marijuana becomes legal on July 1, anyone who wants to use cannabis after that date would be pushed to buy from the black market, which could expand and compete with legal, tax-paying retailers, Jeffries said.

Black market competition could weaken South Dakota’s legal marijuana market, leaving local businesses more vulnerable to interstate competition should the federal government choose to legalize marijuana, Jeffries said.

A few legislators have been considering marijuana regulation in the early days of the 2021 session. Rep. Mike Derby, R-Rapid City, is playing a lead role in forming what he calls the “Cannabis Caucus.” Derby said the group’s goal is mostly to share information and help educate other lawmakers as opposed to offering legislation or coordinating votes. Members plan to meet for the first time on Jan. 21 to review bill drafts, Derby said. 

One of the big issues Derby plans to work on is providing clarity for local governments. Dozens of marijuana businesses are already preparing to begin commercial marijuana growing operations or are preparing to open retail sales outlets in South Dakota. Municipal governments will need guidance on how to safely zone for often large, indoor marijuana farms needed to supply wholesale and retail outlets, Derby said.

“At the end of the day, we want to respect the will of the people,” Derby said. “We have an opportunity to look at what other states have passed, learn from their best practices, learn from their mistakes and maybe create a better process.”  

Rep. Mary Fitzgerald, R-St. Onge, has called for legislation that would make using marijuana in a vehicle and driving while high illegal. South Dakota does not have laws banning marijuana use in vehicles or driving while high because any use or possession of marijuana is still illegal. As of Jan. 13, Fitzgerald had not filed any legislation regarding marijuana use. 

The only bill regarding marijuana legalization that had been filed by Jan. 13 came from the Department of Revenue. Senate Bill 35 asks the Legislature to give the department $4 million to cover the costs of regulating the marijuana industry until tax revenue starts coming in. The bill also asks lawmakers to give the state Department of Health about $135,000 to help cover the cost of regulating medical marijuana.  

Any recreational marijuana bills that legislators pass could be negated by a lawsuit seeking to declare the recreational marijuana vote result as unconstitutional. Backed by Gov. Kristi Noem, the lawsuit was filed by Highway Patrol Superintendent Rick Miller and Pennington County Sheriff Kevin Thom, who argue that the constitutional amendment passed by voters, known as Amendment A, should not have been on the Nov. 3 ballot and is unconstitutional because it was too broad. 

A hearing in the case is scheduled for Jan. 27 in Hughes County circuit court, but no trial date has been set. The circuit court’s final ruling and any subsequent appeals to the state Supreme Court likely won’t be settled until well after the 2021 legislative session ends.

Ian Fury, a spokesman for Gov. Noem, said the governor is in discussion with lawmakers about marijuana legalization but has not engaged in filing or pushing any specific legislation so far. “Many legislators have an interest in this topic and we want to give them the opportunity to convey their thoughts and ideas on behalf of their constituents,” Fury wrote in an email to News Watch.

Some lawmakers question whether the Legislature should be involved in regulating recreational marijuana at all. 

“My interpretation of Amendment A is that it doesn’t allow the Legislature to do anything,” said Sen. Arthur Rusch, R-Vermillion, vice-chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Amendment A did not provide a regulatory framework for the industrial production or commercial sale of large amounts of cannabis. Instead, the amendment requires the state Department of Revenue to devise licensing and regulatory mechanisms that allow for the sale of recreational marijuana by April 1, 2022. Rusch said he believes Amendment A gave full authority over recreational marijuana regulation to the Department of Revenue. 

“That’s one of the reasons I believe (Amendment A) is unconstitutional,” Rusch said. 

Still, legislative leaders in both the Republican and Democratic parties acknowledged that a clear majority of South Dakota voters wanted to see marijuana legalized and that the Legislature is obligated to implement legalization measures. 

“Our feet are set in concrete. Until the courts rule or voters overturn it in another election, it is our job to move forward with legalization,” Cammack said. 

Related posts

•  Four SD residents who campaigned & voted for pot gain intervener status in anti-weed case
• Big Stone County MN sheriff not fully aware of what SD cannabis law says, shares fears anyway
• Rapid City letter-to-editor writer objects to Governor Noem's anti-cannabis nanny state
• Argus Leader: SD Attorney General's office asks judge to dismiss anti-legal cannabis lawsuit
• Will Big Stone Lake become pot tourist haven after South Dakotans vote for legal weed?
• The peculiar knots of cannabis policy prompt GOP kinks in South Dakota and Minnesota

Photo: Cannabis plants.

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post. Those wishing to make a small ongoing monthly contribution should click on the  paypal subscription button.

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

NEW: I'm now on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

Land Stewardship Project has published a thoughtful fact sheet on white supremacy

Somehow, we missed the November 2020 Land Stewardship Project Statement Denouncing White Supremacists Hate Groups. It begins:

The Land Stewardship Project’s mission is to create a more just and sustainable food and farming system for everyone, no exceptions. Our organizing is based on shared values of community, democracy, stewardship, health, and justice. Upholding this foundation is the conviction that we believe in the innate value of people and the land. Racist hatred, exclusion, and violence are clear violations of our strongly held belief that every person has value that cannot be earned or taken away.

Based on this set of values, the Land Stewardship Project condemns the activity of white supremacist and other hate groups, many of whom are seeing a resurgence in the upper Midwest.

The rise of white supremacist groups is paralleling the unwillingness of our nation’s leaders to call them out for what they truly are: a threat to our communities and the future of this country. That is why we call on our leaders at the local, state, and federal level to unequivocally condemn not only the actions of white nationalist, white supremacist, and other hate groups, but the racist, bigoted roots that they are based on. To do otherwise is to be part of the problem. . . .

Go over and read the entire statement.

More recently, LSP published a new fact sheet — White Nationalism & White Supremacy: Looking Beyond White Hoods & Swastikas.

Here's the pdf:

Fact Sheet White Supremacy No 32 by Sally Jo Sorensen on Scribd

Consider joining or donating to this group.

Image: One version of the Boogaloo Bois flag. From the fact sheet: "The Boogaloo Bois movement is an antigovernment extremist movement. The term“boogaloo” refers to a future civil war. While the movement is not explicitly white supremacist, there are white supremacists within the Boogaloo Bois."

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post. Those wishing to make a small ongoing monthly contribution should click on the  paypal subscription button.

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

NEW: I'm now on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6