Bluestem Prairie

Ethanol carbon pipeline opponents doubt certainty of $1 billion corn-based jet fuel project

More on the ethanol carbon pipeline conversation in South Dakota.

From South Dakota Searchlight:

CO2 pipeline opponents doubt certainty of $1 billion corn-based jet fuel project
By John Hult

The largest economic development project in South Dakota history hinges on two things: a carbon pipeline and a $950 million federal loan guarantee.

If the former doesn’t happen, according to the company’s CEO, the money secured through the latter won’t land in South Dakota.

But opponents of the project and the Summit Carbon Solutions pipeline tied to it doubt the company will build in South Dakota or anywhere else.

The project in question is an approximately $1 billion sustainable aviation fuel facility in Lake Preston, dubbed “Net-Zero 1” by Gevo, the Colorado-based carbon abatement firm.

Many state leaders, including Gov. Kristi Noem, have expressed enthusiasm for Net-Zero 1. Her son-in-law, Kyle Peters, is a registered lobbyist for Gevo. Senate Majority Leader Casey Crabtree has described both the pipeline and Gevo projects as critical to the future of South Dakota’s ag industry.

Gevo secured $12.3 million in project assistance through the state’s Reinvestment Payment Plan in 2022, on top of $500,000 in incentives for water infrastructure.

Doug Sombke of the South Dakota Farmers Union isn’t as enthusiastic. He thinks Gevo’s business plan is a house of cards, built on sustainable aviation fuel tax credits that could disappear under a Republican presidential administration and uncertainty on the method the federal government will use to calculate carbon sequestration values.

“This is such a wild-ass dream it’s not even funny,” Sombke said. 

In public forums and legislative hearings on pipeline-related bills, opponents have begun pointing to Gevo’s stock price to suggest that the company isn’t healthy enough to trust. It trades below $1 on the NASDAQ and has since mid-January, and has made a handful of recent lists of stocks to avoid in the business press.

“I think they’re desperate,” said Ed Fischbach, a Mellette-area farmer and vocal opponent of the pipeline and aviation fuel projects. “To be honest with you, I don’t think they’re financially stable, and they’re running out of time.”

The question of time has created a measure of desperation from pipeline opponents, as well. Lawmakers in Pierre are debating Senate Bill 201, which in its current form would offer counties per-mile payments from pipeline companies and certain landowner protections while forcing the state Public Utilities Commission to overrule “unreasonable” local ordinances that restrict pipeline siting. 

Fischbach sees the bill as an attempt by lawmakers to fast-track the pipeline, and to secure Gevo’s future. SB 201 has passed the Senate and the House in different versions, and a conference committee will try to work out the differences during the final days of the legislative session next week.

“We seem to just bend over backwards and give these companies free rein, basically, to try to get them here,” Fischbach said.

Gevo: ‘bizarre questions’

In an interview with South Dakota Searchlight, Gevo CEO Patrick Gruber described the viability questions coming in from the anti-pipeline side of the aisle as “bizarre.”

Companies working in the sustainable aviation fuels business are all laboring under the reality of its nascency, in an investment environment with significant uncertainty on the regulations that will govern it.

In that space, Gruber said, Gevo is as solid as a company can be.

“We have $380 million of cash on the balance sheet,” Gruber said. “We are the most liquid company on the planet who does development like this.”

Eric Frey, Gevo’s vice president of finance and strategy, told investors in an online “fireside chat” with Water Tower Research that the company feels it’s been undervalued. He made similar statements the following week in an online presentation for Renmark Financial Communications.

Gevo isn’t the only renewable fuels company to see a drop in stock prices in recent months, Gruber said. But more importantly, the financing for Net-Zero 1 isn’t tied to Gevo’s market gains or losses. It’s a “special purpose vehicle” project, meaning it’s a separate entity for financing purposes, isolated from the company as a whole.

“It’s a different equity set, different investors. It’s infrastructure people, along with us,” Gruber said. “Our stock price is actually irrelevant.”

Gruber and others see sustainable aviation fuel as an inevitability in a world that increasingly values carbon dioxide abatement to reduce emissions of the heat-trapping gas into the atmosphere.

Airlines have made commitments to purchase sustainable fuel as an offset to their carbon footprints. The Biden administration wants to see 400 billion gallons mixed with conventional jet fuel by 2030, and the Inflation Reduction Act lays out per-gallon payments for it, based on carbon score calculations that have yet to be finalized.

Sustainable aviation fuel is produced now, but is sold by just two U.S. companies and represents 0.1% of all jet fuel, with 15.8 million gallons produced in 2022. 

At the moment, it is only produced using beef tallow or discarded oil. The Inflation Reduction Act has incentives meant to encourage the production of 3 billion gallons by 2030.

Gruber calls ethanol-to-jet fuel the clearest, most cost-effective source path to a production ramp up: the infrastructure is in place, the product works and corn is abundantly available.

Ethanol as a starting point wins on price and practicality, he said, and “it’s by a lot.”

Lower carbon intensity, higher growth potential 

The “threat” to leave South Dakota, Gruber said, is just economic reality. 

The project’s federal financing is tied directly to Gevo’s ability to push down the carbon score of its product. 

To get the federal loan and a return on investment, Gevo needs to take full advantage of the carbon abatement dollars made available through federal and state governments.

Every point below 50 on a 100-point carbon intensity scale is worth money. Gevo has committed to fuels that score zero, but Gruber told lawmakers during a virtual listening session on Monday that they can get to -30 or lower, and produce a fuel that can compete in price with conventional jet fuel.

Cutting the carbon score is the reason Gevo picked Lake Preston: 71% of the area’s farmers use sustainable practices like no-till agriculture, which could translate to a lower carbon score for its corn. It’s why Gevo founded a company called Verity to track and verify carbon scores from corn plant to final product through on-farm data collection. 

It’s also why Gevo aims to build a wind farm near its plant: Turning ethanol into jet fuel is energy intensive – too intensive to turn out a low-carbon product without a renewable energy source.

All those factors are part of securing the $950 million federal loan guarantee, which Gevo first sought last August and expects to have by the end of this year. 

But without a carbon capture pipeline to further drive down the carbon intensity score, Gruber said, the company wouldn’t get that guarantee. Carbon emissions from the plant would be captured, placed in the pipeline and transported to North Dakota for underground sequestration, along with emissions from numerous ethanol plants in multiple states.

There are “lots of states” more committed to carbon abatement than South Dakota, and some where sequestration can happen without a pipeline. 

“Make no mistake, I am going to get a project financed,” Gruber said.

He doesn’t want to leave South Dakota. By the end of this year, he expects the company will have pumped $200 million into the Lake Preston project.

Skeptics: carbon market unreliable

Sombke counts himself a carbon abatement skeptic.

Aside from a northwest Iowa plant that produces renewable natural gas from livestock waste, he said, Gevo’s business is built on capturing carbon. Its Luverne, Minnesota, ethanol plant is idle for now; its Texas-based plant makes aviation fuel to prove it can be done. 

The political mathematics of carbon abatement are too fluid to be taken seriously as a business proposition, he said.

“I think there’s a lot of smoke and mirrors, and I think it’s a lot of hopeful thinking,” Sombke said.

The method of measuring carbon intensity (CI) is just one issue. The Inflation Reduction Act called on the Department of Treasury and Internal Revenue Service to create a framework for measuring CI for the calculation of sustainable aviation fuel tax credits. 

Of the options, Gevo and most agriculture organizations prefer the Greenhouse gases, Regulated Emissions, and Energy use in Transportation model, also known as GREET. South Dakota’s congressional delegation wants that model used to calculate the impact of all biofuels.

The Biden administration recently announced its intention to work on a GREET update that would meet the law’s expectations, and an update on those efforts is expected on Friday. 

But that model is one of several options. If GREET isn’t adopted, the climate smart ag practices built into Gevo’s business plan wouldn’t be worth as much on the carbon ledger.

There are also questions about the political appetite for carbon abatement if former president and climate change skeptic Donald Trump returns to the White House. 

Trump did sign off on the carbon sequestration tax credits that would be used by the Summit Carbon Solutions pipeline during his time in office. But he’s also signaled a desire to overturn the Inflation Reduction Act, the federal law that established the sustainable aviation fuel tax credits. 

The Heritage Foundation, an influential conservative think tank, has argued for an immediate repeal of the act in its “Mandate for Leadership” position paper, part of its “Project 2025” effort to guide conservative policy.

“The next Administration should also push for legislation to fully repeal recently passed subsidies in the tax code, including the dozens of credits and tax breaks for green energy companies in Subtitle D of the Inflation Reduction Act,” the document says.

“These tax incentives can go away in a flash,” said Doug Durante of the Clean Fuels Foundation, a biofuels lobbying organization based in Washington, D.C.

Durante sees a simpler path forward for ethanol and emissions reductions: higher blends of ethanol. The Biden administration has pulled back on its push for electric vehicles and heavy cuts to tailpipe emissions by 2030, Reuters reported earlier this month. 

With millions of gas-powered vehicles on the road and a slowing demand for EVs, more ethanol makes a lot of sense from a climate perspective, Durante said.

“We’re going to be using trillions of gallons of gasoline for who knows how long,” Durante said. “We only put 15 billion gallons of ethanol in it.”

Sombke agrees on that point. He’d like to see the U.S. push for 20% ethanol in all vehicles, as Brazil has done. 

As for carbon abatement credits, he’d much rather see them flow to farmers directly than to companies like Gevo, which has contracted with farmers to buy corn grown using climate-smart practices.

“They’re farming the farmer here,” Sombke said. “Even though the farmer might get paid a little bit more, there’s others that are going to be making more money off of it.”

Gevo: Carbon abatement is the future

Gruber’s not especially concerned about the political winds or a lack of subsidies in the long term.

If carbon credits disappear, he said, that won’t change the trajectory of history. Consumers, particularly younger consumers, are concerned about climate change and are willing to pay more for it.

Republicans who express skepticism about climate change still see the benefit in economic development, he said, which resonates as a strong argument in favor of carbon abatement.

The Conservative Political Action Committee’s recent conference in Florida saw Gov. Noem – who trumpeted Gevo as an economic development win for South Dakota – tied with Vivek Ramaswamy in a straw poll for the group’s preferred vice presidential pick.

On Feb. 19, the New York Times reported that “more than half of the announced major clean energy projects and 67 percent of all announced jobs” have landed in Republican congressional districts.

Encouraging companies to pay farmers more for crops produced using carbon-friendly ag practices, Gruber said, is a win for rural America.

“You might not value it, but by God somebody else does,” Gruber said. “Why wouldn’t you want to get paid for the good work that you’re doing?”

Most farmers understand that and want to take part, he argues. 

Lake Preston-area farmer Paul Casper is among them. Casper was an early Gevo backer, and has had Verity software installed in his equipment for three years to help the company prove its worth. Once equipped, he said, the system logs every movement, every spray of fertilizer and anything else he does on his field, with GPS tracking to note where he’s doing it.

“Whenever you start the combine or sprayer up, it’s collecting data,” Casper said.

He was already practicing no- and low-till agriculture across his 4,000 acres by the time he met Gevo representatives. As the years passed, other Lake Preston-area farmers noticed how much Casper’s healthier, undisrupted soil produced, and followed suit.

The Verity software has made him even more vigilant about how many times he goes out into the field. Even without a per-bushel price boost, he said, he’s saving money on fuel. 

Moving from fuel savings to a future where sequestration is worth money is Casper’s hope. But he also sees it as a necessity for the ethanol industry that’s propped up farmers in South Dakota for decades.

Staying out of the game, he said, will hurt the state in the long run.

“If you don’t sequester carbon, your competition is going to be doing it. That’s going to put us in a real bad place with regards to selling our corn into ethanol and moving that ethanol out of here,” Casper said. “We need to get this done.”

This South Dakota Searchlight is republished online Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. 

Photo: From left, Steve Westra of the Governor’s Office of Economic Development, Lt. Gov. Larry Rhoden, Gevo CEO Patrick Gruber, Lake Preston Mayor Andy Wienk and First Gentleman Bryon Noem participate in a ceremonial groundbreaking for Gevo’s Net-Zero 1 project near Lake Preston on Sept. 15, 2022. (Courtesy Lt. Gov. Larry Rhoden/Twitter/ via South Dakota Searchlight0..

Related posts

• North Dakota Industrial Commission advances CCS marketing despite lawmaker objections
• ND energy councils recommend carbon capture education consultant to Industrial Commission
• Ten bills in South Dakota legislature: eminent domain is the latest front in carbon pipeline fight
• Summit Carbon Solutions denied conditional use permit for pipeline in Northeast Nebraska county
• Another attempt to block ethanol carbon pipelines from using eminent domain fails
• Commentary: Oil pipeline experience proves need for caution with carbon pipelines
• Navigator CO2 Ventures survivor Poet shifts to remaining carbon dioxide pipeline proposal
• Burying the lede: EIS points out improved farming methods & ethanol plants would reduce as much carbon as ethanol carbon pipelines
• MInnesota Department of Commerce releases draft EIS for Otter Tail to Wilkin Carbon Dioxide Pipeline Project; public meetings coming up in Breckenridge & Fergus Falls
• Hundreds of CO2 pipeline critics converged on South Dakota Capitol ahead of legislative session
• CCS squabble: CO2 pipeline debate has resulted in divisions among SD ethanol proponents
• Keystone I pipeline leaks again; after 2017 South Dakota & 2019 North Dakota, Kansas is hit 
• Keystone I pipeline leaks again--this time in ND
• TransCanada's state-of-art pipeline bums out SD utilities comish after 3 leaks in under 10 years
• Sisseton-Wahpeton Oyate concerned about Keystone I Pipeline oil spill in NE 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. 

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

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

Public Religion Research Institute study: over half of MN GOP support Christian nationalism

Bluestem's been covering Christian Nationalist candidates running for office in Minnesota, like Patriot Academy state leader (Constitutional Coach Steve Boyd, who's challenging incumbent Republican Congresswoman Michelle Fischbach. Readers may remember  MN07 Republican challenger Steve Boyd doesn't think of himself as extreme. Why would anyone? and Odd choice given Fischbach's January 6 choices: MN07 primary challenger Steve Boyd hosting Epoch Times "real" January 6 film and town hall.

A new study suggests Boyd is not alone in the North Star State.

From the Minnesota Reformer:

More than half of Minnesota Republicans support Christian nationalism, study finds
By Christopher Ingraham

Nearly three in ten Minnesotans — including a majority of Republicans — hold Christian nationalist views, according to a new survey of all 50 states conducted by the Public Religion Research Institute.

Christian nationalists support an aggressive fusion of church and state, and believe in a “Christian primacy in politics and law,” in the words of conservative commentator David French.

For the purposes of the PRRI survey, respondents were asked how much they agreed with the following five statements:

• The U.S. government should declare America a Christian nation.
• U.S. laws should be based on Christian values.
• If the U.S. moves away from our Christian foundations, we will not have a country anymore.
• Being Christian is an important part of being truly American.
• God has called Christians to exercise dominion over all areas of American society.

The survey group categorized Americans based on their levels of agreement with those propositions. Those who agreed with all five were classified as Christian nationalist adherents, while those supporting most of them were categorized as sympathizers of the cause. 

People disagreeing with most of the five items were labeled as skeptics, while those rejecting all five completely were dubbed rejectors. 

Of the 450 Minnesotans surveyed, 8% were adherents and an additional 20% were sympathizers, while 39% were skeptical and 29% rejected all five notions completely. 

Those breakdowns were virtually identical among all Americans as a whole. 

In Minnesota 53% of Republicans are adherents or sympathizers, while half of independents are skeptics and a solid majority of Democrats reject Christian nationalism.

The margin of error for the Minnesota sample was +/- 5.8 percentage points, while for the national sample it was +/- 0.8 percentage points.

Relative to other Americans, Christian nationalists are less likely to have a four year degree, more likely to be over age 50, more likely to be Republican and more likely to identify as a born-again or evangelical Christian.

Support for Christian nationalism is especially high in conservative rural states. In neighboring North Dakota, for instance, fully half the adult population espouses Christian nationalist views. Support is also high in Republican strongholds along the Gulf Coast as well as parts of Appalachia.

Christian nationalists “see political struggles through the apocalyptic lens of revolution and violence,” according to the PRRI report. Roughly half of adherents and sympathizers believe “there is a storm coming soon that will sweep away the elites in power and restore the rightful leaders,” compared to 22% of skeptics and just 7% of rejectors.

Additionally, more than one third of Christian nationalists agree that “because things have gotten so far off track, true American patriots may have to resort to violence to save the country.” Just 17% of skeptics and 7% of rejectors say the same.

This Minnesota Reformer article is republished online under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0.

Screenshot: Boyd is Constitutional Coach for the Patriot Academy "Biblical Citizenship" training. His Facebook page: Blessings of Liberty. Here's one from 1/2022 "Great weekend of learning Biblical Citizenship capped off with a great discussion panel! Thank you to Rep. Eric Lucero, Rep. Mary Franson, Sen. Torrey Westrom, Maureen Eigen and Pastor Mike Bartolomeo for participating. . . ." This isn't the image the Minnesota Reformer used in its post.

Related posts

• Odd choice given Fischbach's January 6 choices: MN07 primary challenger Steve Boyd hosting Epoch Times "real" January 6 film and town hall
• MN07 Republican challenger Steve Boyd doesn't think of himself as extreme. Why would anyone?
• News brief: Franson is Minnesota State Chair for National Association of Christian Lawmakers
• Nostalgia; or, New Republic article about a right-wing Christian sect takes us to our back pages
• Are ties of new MN Senate majority leader with New Apostolic Reformation recipe for gridlock?

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.

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

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

Press Release: MNHouse Capital Investment & Environment Committees Hold Joint Hearing on PFAS Contamination, Water Infrastructure

Early Wednesday afternoon, Bluestem posted PFAS & infrastructure hearing; bill with bump in buffer penalties clears environment committee, an article centered on a Session Daily article on the buffer bill.

Not long after, this press release from Environment Committee Chair Rick Hansen arrived. I reprint it, followed by the YouTube of the hearing,

RELEASE: House Capital Investment and Environment Committees Hold Joint Hearing on PFAS Contamination’s Effect on Water Infrastructure

SAINT PAUL, Minn. – Today, the House Capital Investment Committee and Environment and Natural Resources Finance and Policy Committee held a joint hearing on PFAS (per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances) contamination and its effect on water infrastructure throughout the state. Today’s joint hearing comes after an analysis from the Minnesota Department of Health showed at least 12 cities where a portion of the drinking water exceeded the EPA’s PFAS standards.

The committee heard testimony from the Attorney General’s office on the status of settlements between 3M and the state of Minnesota in 2018, as well as recent federal settlements between the District Court of South Carolina and 3M and Dupont that apply to some public water systems in Minnesota. Eligible public water systems must apply to receive funds from the federal settlement. Testifiers also provided information on how other states, such as Michigan, are handling PFAS contamination.

“PFAS chemicals are present in Minnesota groundwater and taxpayers should not have to bear the burden of cleaning up a mess created by corporate polluters,” said Rep. Rick Hansen (DFL—South St. Paul), Chair of the House Environment and Natural Resources Committee. “Companies like 3M have long known these chemicals are detrimental to our environment, our water, and our health, and I am dedicated to ensuring Minnesotans are not on the hook for future costly cleanup efforts.”

“The state has a duty to invest in our water infrastructure, but we must also investigate the factors contributing to a polluted water supply,” said Rep. Fue Lee (DFL - Minneapolis), Chair of the House Capital Investment Committee. “For too long, corporations have played it fast and loose with pollutants, leaving taxpayers to pick up the bill. As we craft legislation this year that’ll fund improvements to our infrastructure, we’ll also be looking at ways for corporations to pay their fair share for the problems they create.”

PFAS has been shown to cause serious health problems like cancer and can affect child development. PFAS are commonly used in many products, and humans can be exposed in a number of ways, including drinking contaminated municipal water or private well water or eating food grown near places where PFAS was used or manufactured.

Last year, the Minnesota Legislature passed one of the most robust PFAS laws in the country, including banning the chemicals in children’s products, firefighting foam, and ski wax, and banning all nonessential PFAS use by 2032. The legislation also directed the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) to adopt water quality standards for PFAS.

Here's the Minnesota House information Services YouTube of the hearing:

Photo: This example of a large water filtration facility in New Brighton, MN, for TCE contamination, would be needed for PFAS removal from wastewater for a community of about 5,000 people. Via MPCA.

Related posts

•  MPCA press release: Study shows unaffordable costs of PFAS cleanup from wastewater
• Minnesota PFAS news digest: landfills and pesticides laced with killer forever chemicals 
• Proposed federal EPA PFAS regulation could cost South Dakota millions for testing, cleanup 
• PFAS industry written testimony on Minnesota House bill takes logos to a whole new level 
• If drinking water can go bad in Bemidji, it can be contaminated anywhere 
• Bills banning use of PFAS approved by bipartisan MNHouse environment committee vote 
• Raiders of the lost tobacco settlement pretty piqued about 3M pollution settlement firewall 
• In 2008, Denny McNamara praised 3M for dealing with PFC contamination "in a positive way"
• Don't drink the water: 3M PAC cash in the MN Future (& anti-Bigham) IE money stream in SD54

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. 

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

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

 

PFAS & infrastructure hearing; bill with bump in buffer penalties clears environment committee

UPDATE February 29: Sinc this post was published, Environment Committee Chair Rick Hansen sent out a press release about the joint hearing. Bluestem posted it Thursday morning as Press Release: MNHouse Capital Investment & Environment Committees Hold Joint Hearing on PFAS Contamination, Water Infrastructure.[end update]

I spent the afternoon watching the Minnesota House Environment and Natural Resources Finance and Policy Committee, first in a joint hearing on PFAS and infrastructure with the House Capital Investment Committee. Here's the Minnesota House Information Services YouTube of that meeting:

Minutes after that meeting adjourned, the Environment Committee met on its own to consider four bills. 

Here's the Session Daily's coverage of one bill.

Big bump in buffer penalties could be coming under bill that clears environment committee
By Margaret Stevens

Passed in 2015, Minnesota’s buffer law requiring perennial vegetation in lands bordering water was called Gov. Mark Dayton’s signature clean water legislation.

It’s undergone a few tweaks since its first iteration and could see another this year to beef up penalties.  Wednesday, the House Environment and Natural Resources Finance and Policy Committee approved a bill that would increase the maximum penalty for violating the law from $500 to $10,000.

Following the 9-6 party-line vote, HF3874 next goes to the House Judiciary Finance and Civil Law Committee.

Sponsored by Rep. Rick Hansen (DFL-South St. Paul), the bill would bring maximum penalties into alignment with those assessed for violations of the Wetland Conservation Act. Penalties would be consequential, rather than simply the cost of doing business, he said.

Penalties could be forgiven with sufficient steps to bring a property in compliance.

Minnesota’s buffer law, per the Board of Water and Soil Resources: “requires perennial vegetative buffers of up to 50 feet along lakes, rivers, and streams and buffers of 16.5 feet along ditches.”

Buffers help reduce sediment, fertilizers and other chemicals from entering the water and have been shown to improve water quality and wildlife habitat.

Opponents of the bill say a 20-fold increase in penalties for violating the buffer law is excessive, especially since it could be applied to first-time offenders. Moreover, because there is more than a 95% compliance with the law, penalty increases are unnecessary. 

“It is clear that small farmers take seriously their obligations as stewards of the land,” wrote John Reynolds, Minnesota state director of the National Federation of Independent Business. “We believe the harshest penalties should be reserved for repeat offenders and a graduated penalty structure is more appropriate.”

Further, the bill would make private the data of individuals applying for grants under the state’s Lawn to Legumes program which encourages growth in pollinator habitat. Hansen said the aim is to prevent Minnesotans from being pestered with offers for goods and services after applying for the program.

Here's the YouTube of that hearing:

Photo: : A buffer, via a  2015 Minnesota Soybean Growers Association post, DNR Releases Buffer Mapping Project Details.

Related posts

•  Former Dayton senior policy advisor rips Walz comments on buffers & "regulatory humility"
•  Commentary: South Dakota’s riparian buffer strip initiative lacks gumption 
•  Fact-check: Are Osmek's claims that state buffer law created sans #mnleg approval accurate?
•  In Facebook comment, Rep. Tim Miller compares enforcing buffer strip laws to a police state

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. 

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

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

 

 

North Dakota Industrial Commission advances CCS marketing despite lawmaker objections

Just a follow-up from the North Dakota Monitor. Bluestem had republished its article ND energy councils recommend carbon capture education consultant to Industrial Commission last Thursday.

Looks like I'm not the only one with misgivings about this "education" campaign.

From the North Dakota Monitor:

Industrial Commission advances carbon education despite lawmaker objections
By Jeff Beach

Legislators sign letter opposing use of taxes for marketing campaign

The North Dakota Industrial Commission on Tuesday pushed ahead with a carbon management education program over the objections of a group of legislators. 

The three-person commission voted unanimously to approve a $300,000 contract for AE2S Communications of Bismarck to develop an education and marketing program on carbon capture sequestration and utilization. 

Before the vote, state Sen. Jeff Magrum, R-Hazelton, questioned the timing of the grant, given the controversy over the Summit Carbon Solutions carbon capture and sequestration project.

He cited a pending decision by the North Dakota Supreme Court regarding Summit’s attempt to access private property to survey a potential pipeline route. He also cited Summit’s pending application for a pipeline route before the Public Service Commission. 

Gov. Doug Burgum said the education project “is not intended to try to influence court cases.” He added that the court case and permit may be resolved by the time the educational campaign is ready to launch in 2025.  

The project announced by the Industrial Commission in December is to provide educational materials on the safety and usefulness of carbon dioxide that can be captured from ethanol plants, power plants and other industries. 

One major potential use for carbon dioxide is in enhanced oil recovery, which could extend the life of North Dakota’s oil wells. 

The $300,000 for the campaign comes from taxes paid by the energy industry. 

Burgum, one of three Industrial Commission members, has been a major proponent of carbon capture. But Summit’s five-state project to capture carbon from ethanol plants, including Tharaldson Ethanol at Casselton, has been met with some resistance, especially in Emmons County, where Magrum is from. 

Landowners have expressed concerns about pipeline safety and damage to cropland and property values. 

The Summit project, billed as the world’s largest carbon capture project, would store the carbon underground in Mercer and Oliver counties.

The project has fallen behind its original schedule and is awaiting a hearing with the PSC after it altered its route around Bismarck. 

Summit also will need to apply for an underground storage permit with the Industrial Commision. 

Magrum and 18 other legislators signed a letter telling the Industrial Commission that tax money should not be used for the project. 

“The North Dakota legislature should re-evaluate the discretion it grants the North Dakota Industrial Commission to spend money promoting certain business interests over the interests of North Dakota citizens. Such promotional activities in the name of ‘education’ effectively amount to an endorsement of a particular company and a particular project over the rights and concerns of many citizens,” the letter states. 

The proposal from AE2S included the use of the Fieldstone Group, part-owned by conservative talk radio host and columnist Scott Hennen. Hennen also helped organize Friends of Ag & Energy, which has a website about carbon capture and hosted a public meeting that included Wade Boeshans of Summit Carbon Solutions. Burgum also spoke at the forum. 

Burgum noted that the $300,000 was included in a bill approved by the Legislature. Some of the legislators who signed the letter voted in favor of the legislation. 

The Summit project was not named in the AE2S proposal or mentioned during the meeting that recommended the AE2S proposal to the Industrial Commission. 

This North Dakota Monitor article is republished online under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. 

Photo: Members of the North Dakota Industrial Commission listen to a presentation by Ed Murphy, left, state geologist, during a meeting of the commission at the Capitol on Feb. 27, 2024. Michael Achterling/North Dakota Monitor

Related posts

• ND energy councils recommend carbon capture education consultant to Industrial Commission
•  Climate action digest: North Dakota dollars continue to fight Minnesota clean energy future 
• DeSmogBlog on Project Tundra: expensive greenwashing for fossil fuel
• Fact check: is the Coalition for a Secure Energy Future "hard hat labor" lobbying group? Well, no
• Is putting a smile on Tom Bakk's face the best thing ND lignite research fund has ever done?
• ND state/lignite industry partnership continues funding for Coalition for Secure Energy Future
• North Dakota's coal marketing campaign to give lignite sales pitch at MN electric co-op offices
• Horse hockey: who's pushing the puck for new Coalition for a Secure Energy Future TV ad?

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. 

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

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

Invasive species center among projects included in nearly $80 million environmental trust fund bill

A Session Daily article, republished in keeping with Bluestem's coverage of ENRTF and invasive species.

Invasive species center among projects included in nearly $80 million environmental trust fund bill
By Margaret Stevens

Describing the hundreds of projects funded annually by the Environment and Natural Resources Trust Fund, Rep. Rick Hansen (DFL-South St. Paul) summarized, “Your lottery dollars work for Minnesotans.”

Hansen sponsors HF3377, approved by the House Ways and Means Committee Monday and sent to the House Floor. It would appropriate $79.6 million from the fund for projects recommended by the Legislative-Citizen Commission on Minnesota Resources.

Coming from state lottery proceeds, the money would go to a variety of projects and institutions such as the Department of Natural Resources, Minnesota Zoo and the Bell Museum. Examples of research projects that would receive funding are grants to study the status of bats after white nose disease, model trumpeter swan populations and assessing prairie health regarding pollinator conservation.

Hansen noted one of the larger appropriations would be $7 million to University of Minnesota Invasive Terrestrial Plants and Pests Center, which he said is recognized worldwide. He added the bill would also fund projects related to microplastics, PFAS, pollinators, bison, and state parks.

“It is a diverse bill that provides investments all around the state,” Hansen said.

The Legislative-Citizen Commission on Minnesota Resources recommended funding for 101 projects out of 218 requests. In total, $174 million was sought.

More than one-fourth of the proposed allocation — $20.3 million — would be for land acquisition, habitat and recreation, with projects running from $5 million to develop state trails to $197,000 to the City of Babbitt to design a Birch Lake Marina.  

Other recommendations include:

• $14.99 million for 28 projects relating to foundational natural resources data and information;
• $11.3 million for 22 projects relating to environmental education;
• $10.9 million for 16 projects relating to methods to protect, restore and enhance land, water and habitat;
• $8.3 million for four projects relating to aquatic and terrestrial invasive species;
• $6.9 million for 13 projects relating to water resources;
• $4.8 million for five projects relating to air quality, climate change and renewable energy; and
• $2.1 million for three appropriations to the Department of Natural Resources for administrative and emerging issues.

Ten legislators, five governor’s appointees, one member appointed by the House and one member appointed by the Senate comprise the LCCMR. After receiving grant requests, the commission recommends how to appropriate money from the fund.

Rep. Peggy Scott (R-Andover) was intrigued to see a grant to study jumping worms. “I didn’t know there was such a thing, and I thought, ‘Where would I go to avoid jumping worms?’” she said, earning chuckles.

The University of Minnesota Extension was the first article to show up in her internet search of the worms, which will be listed as an invasive species beginning in July.

“Evidently they eat organic matter which we need to keep,” she said.

Here's the Minnesota House Information Services YouTube of the hearing:

Screenshot: 2024 land acquisition proposals included in HF3377. (Image courtesy the LCCMR).

• Related posts
• ENRTF funds University of Minnesota and MN tribal communities CWD management plan 
• MN House Environment& Natural Resources Committee hears agencies staff on new policies
•  MN House passes bill asking voters to reauthorize lottery proceeds for ENRTF
• ENRTF bill up for House floor vote today; Senate version escapes committee after second chance
• Will ENRTF appropriation extensions bill find new life in Senate Environment committee?
• MN House Enviro & Natural Resources committee approves $71M in ENRTF projects
• Ecklund's HF219 passed out of MN House Environment committee on bipartisan 14-5 vote
• [VIDEO] $1 billion investment: Minnesota House Climate Action Caucus unveils 2022 proposals

f 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. 

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

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

MN DNR announces 2023 deer season harvest results, CWD management findings

I'm waiting for the publication of South Dakota's 2023 deer season harvest, since many neighbors--tribal members and non-Indian-- shared their disappointment with not bagging a deer last fall. I learned last week from a Game, Fish and Parks employee that the 2023 South Dakota deer harvest report likely will be published this week. As it is, there's just the 2022 harvest report online.

I'll have to see if a report is available from the Sisseton Wahpeton DNR as well, since it too issues deer permits, and I learned that this information is compiled separately. 

We had very deep snow in the 2022-2023 winter (but there are no wolves here in Northeastern South Dakota. How does the harvest here compare to that in Minnesota? Of course, I'll have to wade through what may be different metrics and licensing provisions. Obviously, a one-to-one match isn't possible but the comparison should be interesting.

But in Minnesota? A press release from the Department of Natural Resources, likely to be disputed by those doubting the presence of CWD in the state. claiming wolves are largely responsible for Northern Minnesota's poor deer harvest.

DNR announces 2023 deer season harvest results, CWD management findings

Habitat conditions, severe winters and wolf predation influence northern deer numbers

Hunters harvested 158,678 deer during the 2023 hunting season, a lower total harvest than in recent years. Harvest was down 8% compared to the 2022 season and 14% less than the five-year average.

The greatest decreases were in the northern part of the state, where deer harvest compared to 2022 was 21% lower in the northeast region and 8% lower in the northwest region. Other regions saw smaller decreases in harvest, with 3% lower in central and southeast Minnesota, and 4% lower in southern Minnesota.

“In recent years, deer populations have been lower in northern Minnesota, particularly following the severe winters of 2021-2022 and 2022-2023,” said Todd Froberg, big game program coordinator with the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. “Several factors can drive these declines, resulting in fewer deer on the landscape during subsequent hunting seasons.”

Deer numbers can suffer during prolonged severe winters, especially in areas with deep snow or insufficient winter habitat. In these conditions, deer must expend more energy to acquire food, making them more vulnerable to predators. Wolves play a large role as a predator of deer, especially in winter, but there is little evidence to suggest that northern Minnesota’s low deer numbers are directly due to wolf predation. The influence that wolves play in influencing deer populations likely change over time and space, and can be exacerbated in response to other changing conditions, like poor quality wintering habitat.

Northern Wisconsin and the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, also hit hard by severe winter, saw similar declines in deer harvests in 2023.

“This year’s extremely mild conditions do bode well for deer in northern Minnesota, but deer populations in the far north will need several mild winters to start to recover,” Froberg said.   

Crossbows were allowed for all deer hunters for the first time in 2023. Archery harvest totaled 24,088 deer which was a similar total compared to 2022. In 2023, crossbows accounted for 43% of the total archery harvest.

“During this first year of crossbows being legal for all hunters, we sold 6% more archery licenses and youth licenses made up most of that increase,” Froberg said. “Lots of kids who weren’t archery hunting in the past were able to use crossbows and go hunting during the archery season.”

Analysis of the 2023 deer harvest is available in a final deer harvest report. This report and past season harvest reports are available on the Minnesota DNR website.

The Minnesota DNR sets hunting seasons with projected harvest levels designed to move deer populations closer to established goals for each deer permit area throughout the state. These goals are reached through goal setting processes informed by public input and guided by Minnesota’s deer plan. Many of the permit areas in the northern part of the state have conservative regulations to support increases in deer populations. A midpoint review of the white-tailed deer management plan, with a variety of opportunities for public engagement including questionnaires, webinars and meetings, is planned for this summer. 

CWD management update

Chronic wasting disease remains relatively rare in Minnesota, and the Minnesota DNR needs hunters’ help to keep it that way. CWD was detected in 43 hunter-harvested deer during the 2023 fall hunting seasons. Of these, 91% were from the southeast, a region that continues to see persistent CWD infections in wild deer.

“Our fall surveillance efforts detected a CWD positive deer in one new deer permit area, while all other positive cases were found within existing CWD management zones where we have confirmed the disease previously,” said Erik Hildebrand, wildlife health supervisor. “We greatly appreciate hunters’ help monitoring these areas.”

The new area was DPA 342, where a hunter harvested a CWD-positive deer near Wabasha. Before the 2023 season, the Minnesota DNR had added DPA 342 to the CWD surveillance zone in response to detections of CWD in wild deer in bordering Buffalo County, Wisconsin in 2022.

Targeted culling is a management action used to slow the spread of CWD where it is known to exist. The Minnesota DNR does not cull deer across a broad area; all efforts are focused within 2 miles of a known positive location. All culling is conducted with landowner permission. Of the total CWD-positive deer found in Minnesota since 2010, nearly 30% were removed through culling efforts. 

Targeted culling efforts in the southeast started Feb. 5 and will continue through the end of March. Targeted culling also took place in January near Grand Rapids (part of DPA 679) and in a focused area in Crow Wing County (part of DPA 604). Test results are available on the Minnesota DNR CWD page. All deer that are culled are processed by a licensed meat processor and the venison is stored until test results are received. Deer that receive a “not detected” test result are given back to participating landowners or donated to food banks for distribution to local food shelves. All deer that test positive are brought to the University of Minnesota Diagnostic Laboratory for disposal in an alkaline digestor.

Hunters and conservation partners are critical in helping control CWD and maintaining the health of Minnesota’s deer herd. The DNR thanks hunters, taxidermists, meat processors, tribal nations and deer conservation partners (Minnesota Conservation Federation, Minnesota Deer Hunters Association, Bluffland Whitetails Association and Backcountry Hunters & Anglers) that helped collect or submit samples for testing.

For more information about deer hunting in Minnesota, visit the Minnesota DNR deer hunting webpage. Additional information on CWD can be found at the Minnesota DNR CWD webpage.

Photo: A whitetail buck.

Related posts

• Is it hunting? In South Dakota, ‘wild’ game increasingly raised in captivity for profit 
• Minnesota Deer Hunters Association creates Wolf Report website; seeks public sightings
• Another card dealt in MN wolf management story: feds agree to draft new wolf recovery plan
• Fact check: what is the Leech Lake Band of Ojibwe's stand on wolf management?
• MN Reformer: Maps reveal where Minnesota deer hunters struck big, and struck out
• Don Peay shows up: will Hunters4Hunters be on receiving end of Utah's $500,000 war on wolves?
•  MN DNR press release: CWD detected in a wild deer near Wabasha in southeastern Minnesota 
• Outdoor News: Minnesota DNR reports jump in CWD-positive test results in white-tailed deer
•  Minnesota DNR: Tribal Chronic Wasting Disease surveillance contributes to statewide effort 
• Session Daily: Bill targets deadly deer disease with tighter proposed restrictions on farms
• VIDEO: MN House environment committee passes most sweeping anti-CWD measure to date
• Update: wild CWD detection in Beltrami County possibly connected to deer farm dump site 
• DNR: Chronic wasting disease suspected in a wild deer in Bemidji area for the first time
• MN Chronic Wasting Disease dilemma: should new deer farms be blocked? The old bought out?
• Chronic Wasting Disease: St. Louis County permanently bans new or expanded cervid farms
• Todd Miller's deer farm was depopulated Tuesday,
• On Facebook, operator of CWD doomed Winona County deer farm wears Miller Scrap hat 
• MN Board of Animal Health: CWD confirmed in quarantined Winona County captive deer herd
• Update: More on Miller family deer farm interests
• Senate DFL Leader Franzen raises conflict-of-interest concerns in Republican leader's role overturning bipartisan vote to protect wild deer 

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.

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

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

Meet the man who exposed Mike Lindell's election lies and won $5 million

Please note the update on the bottom of this post.

Back in 2021, Bluestem posted a couple of times about Mike Lindell's election denying Cyber Symposium, focusing on Minnesota legislators who attended the event:  Draz, Gruenhagen, Mort & "a number if other MN legislators" at Mike Lindell's Cyber Symposium and Back from Sioux Falls, senator Paul Utke flaunts Mike Lindell bobblehead in Facebook interview.

Since then, Lindell's fortunes have declined, and he recently was ordered by a federal judge in Minnesota to pay pay $5 million with interest to computer forensics expert Bob Zeidman within 30 days.

I guess Lindell's election fraud claims were nothing for the Minnesota lawmakers to write home about. And it's not as if South Dakota doesn't have its share of election deniers.

Here's an introduction to Zeidman from South Dakota News Watch.  

Meet the man who exposed Mike Lindell's election lies and won $5 million
by Stu Whitney

My Pillow founder and Donald Trump supporter Mike Lindell claimed to have proof that the 2020 presidential election was stolen. Bob Zeidman exposed it as "gibberish."

SIOUX FALLS, S.D. – Bob Zeidman has visited South Dakota just once in his lifetime. He could be $5 million richer because of it.

The computer forensics expert attended a Cyber Symposium in August 2021 in Sioux Falls hosted by My Pillow founder and election conspiracy theorist Mike Lindell, who claimed to have incriminating data from the 2020 presidential election. Among Lindell's claims was that China hacked into U.S. voting systems and helped elect Joe Biden over Donald Trump.

Lindell was confident enough to launch the “Prove Mike Wrong Challenge” as part of the event at the South Dakota Military Heritage Alliance. He offered $5 million to anyone who could show that data and other materials he released were not actually from the 2020 election.

Zeidman, who specializes in software security and analysis, was skeptical soon after arriving in Sioux Falls. Lindell had promised “packet captures,” records of internet activity that purportedly showed votes being altered from Trump to Biden. But those in attendance saw nothing of the sort.

“Not only was there no packet capture data, there was no data,” Zeidman, 64, told News Watch in a phone interview from his home in Las Vegas. “There was nothing. It was gibberish. At one point I called my wife and said, 'Start thinking about what you want to do with the $5 million.'”

Lindell vows to appeal $5 million ruling

Zeidman filed a report of his findings that was rejected by Lindell but backed up by an arbitration panel after Zeidman sued. On Feb. 21, a federal judge in Minnesota found “no evidence that the arbitration panel exceeded its authority” and ordered that Lindell pay $5 million with interest to Zeidman within 30 days.

Lindell also faces a $1.3 billion defamation lawsuit filed by Dominion Voting Systems for claiming that the company rigged the 2020 election as well as a separate lawsuit by a different voting machine company, Smartmatic.

Lindell, who could not be reached by News Watch, told The Associated Press that he plans to appeal the federal court ruling that upheld the $5 million award from the symposium.

“Of course we're going to appeal it,” he said. “This guy doesn't have a dime coming.”

Zeidman disputes that assessment, as do his lawyers. But the lifelong Republican, who voted for Trump in 2016 and 2020, isn't sure what to make of his time in the spotlight, saying, "I never expected to be in this position."

The founder of several Silicon Valley tech firms does believe election fraud exists in some forms. But he saw Lindell's hacking claims as dangerous because they sparked outlandish conspiracy theories rather than rational discussion about election security.

"Every human endeavor has fraud," Zeidman said. "But it's extremely unlikely that voting machines were in any way responsible. There are too many people like me who are trained to spot hacking. Machines can have bugs that randomly throw out votes. And I'm sure that happens, and that's scary. But if somebody were to hack the election to purposely throw it, they'd be caught. It's that simple."

Zeidman: 'I realized it was all nonsense'

Lindell, a Minnesota native who overcame drug addiction and became a self-made millionaire with his infomercial-fueled pillow venture, consulted with South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem to hold his three-day cyber symposium at the Military Heritage Alliance facility, previously Badlands Pawn.

Noem campaigned for Trump alongside Lindell ahead of the 2020 election and reportedly traveled on Lindell's private jet in May 2021 to attend the Republican Governors Association meeting in Tennessee.

The symposium in Sioux Falls was billed as invitation-only for cyber experts, politicians and media, with hotel expenses prepaid for data specialists. Lindell vowed that the election revelations would be explosive enough to reach the U.S. Supreme Court and potentially restore Trump to the White House.

Spent a couple days with one of the best Governors @govkristinoem and my good friend @CLewandowski_ speaking at events to support the best President ever @realDonaldTrump! pic.twitter.com/1jarXVrlB3

— Mike Lindell (@realMikeLindell) September 17, 2020

Zeidman, who viewed Lindell as a rags-to-riches American success story, acknowledged being intrigued by the possibilities surrounding the event.

“My friends were saying that I should go and, you know, maybe I’d win $5 million,” Zeidman told News Watch. “I said, ‘Well, Lindell has a team of experts that already vetted the data and they think it’s correct. Now they could be wrong, but I'm not going to be able to figure that out in three days.' But then I thought I'd be there for history in the making. Either an election would be overturned or this major figure would be exposed for misrepresenting the facts. So I thought it would be a fun experience and decided to go there. And then within three hours, I realized it was all nonsense.”

Elusive search for packet captures

Zeidman and the other experts were seeking packet capture data, or PCAPs, which Zeidman describes as “small chunks of information that are sent over a network like the Internet and then reassembled at the other end.” Lindell had promised PCAPs of votes flowing outside U.S. systems to China and coming back as votes for Biden rather than Trump.

Other specialists had the same suspicions as Zeidman.

Robert Graham, a data consultant and popular blogger on cyber issues, told Reuters that he quickly concluded that the data presented in Sioux Falls was “bunk” and “the product of a "deranged imagination.”

But Zeidman, a graduate of Cornell and Stanford who designs forensic software technology, knew that he needed to go deeper to prove the data had no connection to the 2020 election, a prerequisite for claiming the $5 million prize.

He was able to convert one of the data sets back to its origin as a Microsoft Word file containing a random series of IP addresses.

“With no other information, they were about as meaningful as a list of random words," he wrote in "Election Hacks," a book he self-published in November 2023. "I repeated the same process with the other text files and found even stranger stuff. These files were also word processor documents but contained thousands of lines of gibberish.”

'Maybe this is a lost cause'

Zeidman began typing up his findings in his Sioux Falls hotel room at the Sheraton, using his experience as an expert witness in data-related court proceedings to present the evidence in ways that were difficult to refute.

There was a surreal moment when he crossed Russell Street to return to the Military Heritage Alliance on the second day of the conference, illustrating the confluence of election conspiracies and Trump's enduring political appeal.

“There were people with signs outside the venue like ‘Honk If You Love Trump,’ and there was a woman in a bikini with an American flag," Zeidman told News Watch. "They looked at me and said, ‘God bless you for what you’re doing.' And I sort of thought, you might not feel that way if you knew what I was up to."

[Read the federal court order in Ziedman's favor here]

Lindell’s team released 50 more gigabytes of data the second day, followed by another batch of 509 files. It was more of the same, Zeidman concluded, plus a spreadsheet containing generic information about internet service providers around the world, but no link to the 2020 election.

He was worried, though, that Lindell’s strategy was to provide so much data that it would become impossible to refute it all. The $5 million seemed to be slipping away.

“I started thinking, maybe this is a lost cause,” said Zeidman. “Then I got the idea to check for the dates of these new files. And it turned out that they were created or modified within a week of the symposium, which ruled out any connection to the election.”

More patriotism than data analysis

Any attempts to engage directly with Lindell regarding this information was difficult, according to Zeidman. His group passed along a note asking for more data, specifically PCAP files, but he's not sure if the message ever got through.

“He was on stage for six to eight hours a day just talking nonstop to the audience,” said Zeidman.

On the morning of the third day, Lindell told attendees that he had been attacked the previous night near the elevator at the Sheraton by someone who asked him to pose for a photo.

“I’m OK. It hurts a little bit,” Lindell said from the stage, according to the Argus Leader. “I just want everyone to know all the evil that’s out here.”

Sioux Falls police investigated the incident but arrested no one. Lindell later claimed that he was "aggressively poked" by the person seeking a selfie.

By that point, it appeared to Zeidman and other cyber experts that what they initially perceived as a scientific data exploration had become more like a star-spangled stage production.

“There were a lot of people that were very patriotic, and I consider myself patriotic,” said Zeidman. “Lindell would have everyone recite the Pledge of Allegiance at the beginning, which I think is great. And then we’d sing 'God Bless America' or the national anthem. But any time he ran out of things to talk about, he’d say, 'Let’s get up and sing the national anthem again.' After a while, I thought, 'OK, this is a little ridiculous.' But people were so enthusiastic.”

Lindell: Arbitration ruling 'disgusting'

Zeidman registered his report with the U.S. Copyright Office, put it on a flash drive and submitted it to Lindell's team before leaving town.

Lindell never responded, so Zeidman hired lawyers and filed an arbitration lawsuit that dragged on for 18 months before a hearing was scheduled before a three-person American Arbitration Association panel in January 2023.

Zeidman said his experience as an expert witness in trials involving computer forensics helped prepare him for the four-day arbitration hearing, during which Lindell questioned his credentials and conclusions.

“I don't know if I had an advantage or not, but I know (Lindell) had a disadvantage because he couldn't stick to the subject,” Zeidman said. “He had to keep going on about voter fraud. At one point, his lawyer was trying to make the argument that the contest wasn't just about packet data and that I hadn't won the contest by merely proving there was no packet data. But they basically had to abandon that argument because when they asked Lindell what the contest was about, he said, ‘Packet data! It was all about packet data!’”

The panel ruled unanimously in Zeidman’s favor in April 2023, ordering Lindell to pay the $5 million. Lindell appealed the ruling, but the odds were against him. The legal standard for overturning an arbitration ruling requires proving that the judgment was obtained  by “corruption, fraud, or undue means” or that the arbitrators showed misconduct or exceeded their powers.

In an interview with the New York Times following the decision, Lindell called the ruling "disgusting" and "mused about how (Zeidman) had been granted admission to the symposium."

Lindell's financial problems mount

Lindell’s lawyers tried to show in Minneapolis federal court that the arbitrators exceeded their powers by allowing Zeidman to argue that the symposium data had to include packet capture data to be connected to the 2020 election.

U.S. District Judge John Tunheim, while noting that the panel had to interpret a “poorly written contract,” agreed that Zeidman's packet capture argument was “quite a leap” in the context of the challenge. Still, Tunheim concluded, the court’s responsibility was “not to evaluate the merits but rather ensure that the panel acted appropriately” and that narrow review led him to confirm the arbitration award.

Though Lindell immediately stated his intention to appeal, he’ll face the same hurdles at the next stage of the process. As for Lindell's financial woes, which led him to tell CBS MoneyWatch in October 2023 that he has "$10,000 to my name,” Zeidman believes he will get his money.

"The good news is that our case is moving along much faster than that Dominion and Smartmatic cases, because those will bankrupt him for sure," said Zeidman. "Those are for more than a billion dollars each. He doesn't have that kind of money, but I think he can manage mine."

'I'm not sure that I did enough'

Though it’s easy to dismiss Lindell’s cyber symposium as failing to achieve its goals, a stance backed up by the courts, it still has political resonance.

The organizers of South Dakota Canvassing Group, a grassroots organization that questions the security of state election systems and calls for greater transparency, has cited Lindell’s event as inspiration.

Electoral activism remains prominent in South Dakota, with elected officials such as Secretary of State Monae Johnson and Minnehaha County Auditor Leah Anderson posing questions about election integrity as part of their political path.

Trump, who still claims the 2020 election was stolen, is the overwhelming favorite to win the Republican nomination in 2024, setting up a likely rematch with Biden in which ballot security will be a pervasive topic as November approaches.

So where does this leave Zeidman?

He’s a supporter of No Labels, a bipartisan organization exploring ballot options for centrist voters who reject the major-party candidates. He plans to donate some of the $5 million award to election integrity causes, including the Nevada Policy Research Institute, which describes itself as a "free-market think tank that seeks private solutions to public challenges."

The fact that Zeidman was able to publicly debunk some of the most salacious misinformation surrounding the 2020 election has earned him some headlines. But he knows there is still much work to be done.

“Republicans will come up privately and thank me for what I did, but publicly (Lindell) is still a hero to a lot of people," he said. "In many ways it’s a shame because he turned his life around and became a successful entrepreneur. But he's spreading these things and people are scared to confront him because he still has a lot of power. In that respect, I’m not sure I did enough.”

UPDATE: On X, Max Hailperin called attention to a December 2023 with Zeidman by Deena Winter in the Minnesota Reformer:

See also https://t.co/hOGS4LMAzU

— Max Hailperin (@MaxHailperin) February 26, 2024

This South Dakota News Watch article is republished online with SDNW's permission.

Photo: My Pillow founder and election conspiracy theorist Mike Lindell hosted a Cyber Symposium in August 2021 at the South Dakota Military Heritage Alliance in Sioux Falls, S.D. He offered $5 million to anyone who could show that data and other materials he released were not actually from the 2020 election. (Photo: Bob Zeidman)

Related posts

• Draz, Gruenhagen, Mort & "a number if other MN legislators" at Mike Lindell's Cyber Symposium  
• Back from Sioux Falls, senator Paul Utke flaunts Mike Lindell bobblehead in Facebook interview
• Rick Weible includes SD Secretary of State Monae Johnson as swamp dweller
• Ben Davis, Master of Ceremonies for Dec 2021 'Searching For Truth' event, GOP endorsed in 6A
• Westrom wouldn't talk to local reporter about why he attended sketchy election fraud event
• Funhouse mirrors? The peculiar GOP endorsed secretary of state candidates in MN & SD 
• MN Reformer: Republican Party of Minnesota endorses election denier to oversee elections

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.

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

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

 

SD Corrections secretary: New women’s prison could be filled with addicts on day one

South Dakota is alone among the state in being able to charge those who fail drug test with the crime of possession by ingestion. It's an expensive approach to tackling drug abuse.

From the South Dakota Searchlight:

Corrections secretary: New women’s prison could be filled with addicts on day one
By John Hult

Warning comes after more than a decade of debate on South Dakota drug laws

PIERRE – The state’s new women’s prison may well be full when it opens, South Dakota’s corrections secretary said this week, a reality largely attributable to the prevalence of drug abuse in the penal population. 

The new prison will free up space for addiction treatment, but the secretary said she’s concerned about the potential for more crowding in the womens’ facilities if the state doesn’t find a way to address its approach to substance abuse.

Lawmakers heard those warnings during debate on funding for the Rapid City minimum security prison, which passed the full Senate this week after a hearing in the budget-setting Joint Appropriations Committee.

Senate Bill 50 would provide additional money needed to cover the project’s $87 million price tag, after legislators set aside a portion of the money last year. Lawmakers have allocated another $567 million for a proposed new men’s prison in Lincoln County, to replace the aging penitentiary in Sioux Falls.

Few lawmakers have questioned the need. The state’s only women’s prison, located in Pierre, houses twice the number of inmates it’s designed for, packed into classrooms and a gymnasium. The state currently pays Hughes County to hold more than 70 female inmates at the county jail. 

The new prison will have an addiction wing, and its existence will open up space for treatment in the current prison. 

But some are concerned that a new facility for women in a state that imprisons most of its female convicts for drug use could set the state up for more costly prison projects.

“We need new facilities, because we currently have incredible overcrowding,” defense lawyer lobbyist Terra Larson said. “But I just want you guys to think about the fact that if you build it, they will fill it, and we may or may not be back here again.” 

Corrections Secretary Kellie Wasko, when asked about growth projections in the female inmate population, said she’d like to see her agency collaborate with lawmakers and the Unified Judicial System on diversion programs for addicts.

“If we don’t do something to address the substance use in South Dakota, we’re going to open up a facility and we’re going to be right at capacity,” Wasko said. 

History of concern over harsh drug laws

A consulting firm called the DLR Group hinted at the same issue in the report it issued on prison facilities in 2022. The report has served as the basis for discussions on new prisons in South Dakota, and it identified the women’s prison as the area of highest need. 

At the time of the study, 60% of female inmates were imprisoned for drugs. The state had acknowledged, the report says at the outset, that “absent significant criminal justice reform, as the state’s population continues to grow, the prison population may surpass the operating capacities.”

In the latest annual report from the Department of Corrections, drug possession and drug ingestion mark the highest-level felony for 69% of the women imprisoned in South Dakota for a nonviolent offense. Such offenses represent 81% of all crimes committed by female inmates in the state.

It’s not the first time South Dakota’s approach to drug use has drawn scrutiny or sparked debate. Drug policy questions bubbled in the background as the Pierre facility packed more and more women into its cells, classrooms and recreation areas

A crime trends report from February 2023, the latest available on the corrections website, shows a 66% increase in drug crimes since 2013 – the same year former Gov. Dennis Daugaard signed a sweeping criminal justice reform bill into law designed in part to hold the need for new prisons at bay.

“Absent a change in approach, South Dakota should expect to have more than 4,500 inmates by 2022,” the state’s 2012 Criminal Justice Initiative Work Group’s final report reads. It also suggests that without reform, the state would need new prisons in that same time frame.

As of January, there were 3,690 inmates incarcerated in South Dakota prisons in total, well below the feared-for figure of 4,500. 

The female inmate population, however, has far surpassed the report’s projections for what might happen without reform. For women, the report said the state would reach its “female system capacity of 498 beds by 2015.”

In 2015, the female population hovered at around 400. By 2016, the figure hit nearly 500. There were 558 women in Department of Corrections custody as of January.

Warnings from defense lobby, ACLU

The 2013 reforms created a presumption of probation for drug possession. But they did not remove felony penalties for drug possession, as defense lawyers had suggested it should during task force meetings on the issue in 2012. Nor did it repeal South Dakota’s ingestion law, the only one in the nation that allows prosecutors to charge people with felony drug possession for a failed drug test.

Opponents warned the reform backers – a group that included every arm of state government as well as sheriffs, police chiefs and prosecutors – that failure to address the state’s harsh drug laws would blunt the impact of reforms.

“It is clear that the bill is missing an opportunity to save significant taxpayer dollars, reduce the burden on our prisons, and stem this tide of the low-level nonviolent offenders who occupy our prison beds,” said Tiffany Campbell, then a policy director for the American Civil Liberties Union of South Dakota.

Several attempts to repeal South Dakota’s ingestion law have come to Pierre in the intervening years, but none – including the most recent in 2023 – have landed on the governor’s desk.

Michael Winder, spokesperson for the Department of Corrections, did not respond to emails from South Dakota Searchlight requesting an interview with or statements from Secretary Wasko clarifying the kinds of steps the agency might want to take to address the state’s approach to drug crimes and its impact on prison populations.

New facilities would offer treatment

Nonviolent offenses and violent offenses alike tend to have ties to substance abuse. When speaking to legislators during committee hearings, Wasko has repeatedly stressed the importance of addiction treatment for female inmates.

“Honestly, 98% of the females in our custody have a substance use disorder,” Wasko said this week.

On the Senate floor, Sioux Falls Democrat Reynold Nesiba worried aloud that the state’s new prison could make it easier to ignore the impact of the state’s ingestion and possession laws on women struggling with addiction

“I worry that we’re trying to arrest our way out of a public health problem,” Nesiba said.

Nesiba supported the bill, but said he did so in hopes that a new building would help inmates change their lives through rehabilitation in a way they can’t in the current cramped quarters.

“We need them to get well. We need them to take care of their families. We need them back in the workforce. We want them to be rehabilitated, and to be all that they can possibly be,” Nesiba said. “I’m hoping this new facility allows us to do that.”

The bill’s sponsor, Big Stone City Republican John Wiik, said addressing addiction and repeat offenses has to start with a new building. His arguments on the floor for SB 50 revolved around the notion that conversations about recidivism, addiction or incarceration’s impact on society at large can’t begin in earnest until the immediate need for more space is addressed.

“We certainly can’t deal with any of these issues when we have women sleeping in a gymnasium,” Wiik said.

Sen. Helene Duhamel, R-Rapid City, said she has full confidence that Wasko, a nurse by training who came to the job of secretary in South Dakota after decades in corrections in Colorado, will not drop the ball on drug treatment or rehabilitation. 

“She is building, in the plan for the women’s facility in Rapid City, a whole wing dedicated to addiction treatment,” Duhamel said. “I think it’ll be a big improvement, and put corrections into a correctional facility.”

This South Dakota Searchlight article is republished online under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0.

Photo: Participating in an Oct. 16, 2023, groundbreaking for a women’s prison in Rapid City are, from left, Rep. Eric Emery, D-Rosebud; Rep. Steve Duffy, R-Rapid City; Rep. Mike Derby, R-Rapid City; Sen. Mike Diedrich, R-Rapid City; Sen. Helene Duhamel, R-Rapid City; and Pennington County Sheriff Brian Mueller. (Seth Tupper/South Dakota Searchlight).

Related post

•  The first step to recovery is admitting there's a problem; or, Meth, We're On It in 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.

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

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

 

House 27B: 2022 Daudt challenger Rachel Davis faces complications in 2024 special election bid

There's going to be a primary for the special election in Minnesota House District 27B to fill the seat left vacant by the resignation of Kurt Daudt.

As the Elk River Star News editor Jim Boyle reports:

Rachel Davis, a 44-year-old St. Francis woman, hopes to knock off Bryan Lawrence in a special primary on Feb. 29 for House District 27B in hopes of running in a March 19 special election.

As the headline for the article-- House 27B candidate faces potential jail time for probation violation--suggests, there's more to the story than the lede.

Boyle reports:

. . .She’s doing this with a cloud of uncertainty hanging over her head, as she has a probation violation hearing on March 28 that could send her to jail for nearly three months.

Davis had intentions of seeking the Republican endorsement for House District 27B, but she decided to take her campaign straight to the primary for voters’ support after a dust-up with a screening committee ahead of the event.

Davis chose not to attend the Feb. 10 endorsing convention in Zimmerman after a GOP screening committee called her out on legal issues that started with a DUI one summer morning in 2022.

“The committee did not support me because I am on probation for a DUI,” Davis said. “I was asleep on the side of the road and got approached by a police officer. It was my first offense and I was (put) on probation for two years. They had a hard time with that.

“I told them everybody makes mistakes and I am a fighter and we need fighters down at the Capitol. They couldn’t get off their high horse, so I said, ‘Fine, I will just run in the primary.’”

The Star News learned after the convention and reported in its Feb. 17 edition that Davis still had one more court appearance, according to a Feb. 9, 2024, document calling for a possible revocation of the terms of her probation. She is due in court on March 28 due to a reported parole violation, according to the document filed the day before the endorsing convention.

Davis told the Star News on Feb. 14 she was not aware of any further problems and had not received any notice of the court date.

The Star News has since learned what triggered the hearing for Davis is a Jan. 14, 2023, incident at a comedy show at the Chanhassen Dinner Theater. The Star News confirmed on Feb. 21 with Erik Thorson, an Anoka County communications officer, that the Jan. 14 incident is the reason for the upcoming probation violation hearing.

Davis told the Star News on Wednesday she was honest with the Star News when she said she had not received notice of the hearing and had taken care of everything in court up to that point. She stated in a text to the Star News she has sought legal counsel.

2023 citation subject of March 28 hearing

The Carver County Sheriff’s Office responded to a call of a patron who was reportedly being belligerent and hitting people, according to an incident complaint report drawn up by the responding deputies.

Event security advised deputies that Davis had gone up on stage and was talking about Jesus and the republic of the United States, according to the complaint.

Upon police arrival, security guards were struggling to hold onto Davis, who after requests for her to calm down was eventually handcuffed. After another deputy arrived, she was placed in a squad car.

Due to Davis’ level of intoxication and not having anyone to care for her, it was determined she would go to the hospital to be evaluated. After she was cleared by a doctor, she was taken to jail.

While en route to jail, Davis stated she was very powerful and used expletives to say they would suffer consequences for their actions, the incident report stated.

During the ride to jail, she reportedly stated she was running for 27B. She also made several threatening remarks to the deputy who was transporting her to jail related to him specifically and others, the report said.

Davis was cited for disorderly conduct and obstructing legal process. She was booked and released from the Carver County Jail to a sober party.

Legal problem began summer of 2022

Davis was arrested for DUI on July 28, 2022, after a St. Francis police officer observed her sitting in a vehicle on the side of a city street with the car keys on the dashboard. The complaint said she appeared to be sleeping.

Davis agreed to a plea deal that dropped a gross misdemeanor charge and convicted her of a misdemeanor, according to court documents. She said her probation is scheduled to expire later this year.

Davis still has jail time hanging over her head from the plea agreement that could be revoked at the March 28 remote hearing with Judicial Officer Jonathan Neal Jasper of the Anoka County District Court.

That hearing is less than 10 days after the March 19 special election for House District 27B.

She seems nice.

The paper had earlier reported Davis takes her campaign to special primary set for Feb. 29.

For a better taste of the candidate, Bluestem recommends this YouTou of Davis speaking at the Minnesota State Capitol on February 3:

The remarks were delivered in the State Capitol Rotunda on February 3 as part of the Stand Up MN rally.  The Facebook page for the event notes that it was organized by conservative activist Raul Estrada and included the following agenda:

The primary focuses will be....

 

#1. Address the redesigning of the Minnesota state flag...under the false pretense of it being offensive to Natives.

 

#2. Highlight some of Minnesotas long time Frontline fighters and activists that have been on the front lines carrying the weight of protecting and defending Minnesotas rights, freedoms, and values.

 

#3. Call out keyboard and armchair warriors to either join the fight....
or simply...shut the fuck up.

Our Minnesota activists are spending too much time answering stupid questions and debating with people blowing a lot of hot air...but never show up for the fights.Bottom line...either take an active stance...or sit the fuck down.
If you're not going to actively participate...You're just being a fucking roadblock.

 

We will provide Democrat registration materials for armchair/keyboard warriors....because ultimately...that's what you are.

Stand up...or simply shut the fuck up.

(Disclaimer: This event is not intended for the thin skinned weak, snowflakes, or easily offended. It's intended to weed out the useless "weeds"...to allow patriots to grow in strength) 

Lovely company to keep.

This bid isn't the first time Davis has primaried an endorsed Republican for the seat. In February 2022, Deena Winter reported for the Minnesota Reformer in Action 4 Liberty candidates challenging Republicans across the state:

. . . Politicos from both parties say the following candidates seem to be aligned with Action 4 Liberty: . . .

• Rachel Davis says she’s challenging House Minority Leader Kurt Daudt and opposes lockdowns and wants “controversial Dominion-type (voting) machines” removed. (Six Minnesota counties use Dominion equipment, and Trump won all but one of those counties in 2020. Dominion has filed billion-dollar defamation lawsuits against a bevy of people who spread conspiracy theories about their voting machines, including Trump lawyers Rudy Giuliani and Sidney Powell, MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell and Newsmax.) , , . 

 On August 10, 2022, John Wagner reported for the Elk River Star New in Daudt wins Republican primary for Minnesota House seat representing District 27B:

Kurt Daudt won his Republican primary to maintain his hope of retaining his seat in the Minnesota House of Representative from District 27B in voting that took place Tuesday, Aug. 9.

With all 18 precincts having reported, Daudt – the endorsed Republican candidate for the position – received 2,189 votes (73.19%) to advance.

Rachel Davis received 802 votes (26.81%) and was eliminated from the race. . . 

The primary took place after the 2022 DUI offence, but Bluestem would like to think it was something she said that led to her loss.

H/t to County News Review post on X that caught my attention to this story:

One of the Republican candidates for the House 27B seat is dealing with the potential of probation violation, which would lead to jail time ... https://t.co/DLxazbGJEz@morningtake @MaxHailperin

— County News Review (@CoNewsReview) February 23, 2024

Photo: Rachel Davis, YouTube screencap.

Related posts

• Is guy Minority Leader Kurt Daudt rear-ended one icy January primarying him in 2020? Same name 
• Minority Leader Kurt Daudt, two GOP primary challengers attend tasteful winery fundraiser

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.

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

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

Rep. Rick Hansen: After 35 years of process producing more nitrates in water, time to change

During Thursday's House Agriculture Finance and Policy Committee hearing on nitrates in drinking water and soil, South St. Paul DFL Representative Rick Hansen, who worked for the Minnesota Department of Agriculture before running for the legislature, delivered a pointed criticism of the process and called for change.

Here's video of his remarks. (full hearing video at the bottom of this post).

Hansen, whose Economic Interest Statement notes his income from farming and ownership of hundreds of acres of farmland in Fillmore and Freeborn County, as well as chairing the House Environment and Natural Resources Finance and Policy Committee, may be in the catbird's seat to address the ongoing crists.

There's more on the hearing at the Minnesota Reformer.

Madison McVan reported in EPA directive renews debate over state’s role in protecting drinking water from farm pollution:

For more than 30 years, Minnesota elected officials have directed time and public money into plans designed to address the growing issue of agricultural pollution in groundwater, largely with incentives for farmers to voluntarily adopt practices that reduce fertilizer runoff.

Rep. Rick Hansen, DFL-South St. Paul, was on a 1989 Nitrogen Fertilizer Task Force that outlined best management practices to reduce nitrate pollution. 

Decades later, Hansen found himself in a committee hearing room, listening to the same proposals, even as the problem has worsened.

“The outcome has been more fertilizer use, more nitrates,” Hansen said Thursday. “Things have to change.”

The federal government agrees. Environmental Protection Agency officials informed state agencies in November that Minnesota hasn’t done enough to protect drinking water from nitrates — a toxic byproduct of fertilizers and livestock manure — in southeast Minnesota. 

Drinking water with high levels of nitrate can cause methemoglobinemia or “blue baby syndrome,” a potentially life-threatening condition affecting the blood’s ability to carry oxygen throughout the body. Pregnant women and infants are particularly vulnerable to the effects of nitrates. Nitrates have also been linked to thyroid disease and certain cancers.

People who get drinking water from private wells are at high risk of consuming water with dangerous levels of nitrates because well owners are responsible for their own testing and treatment — unlike municipal water systems, which constantly monitor and address nitrate levels.

The House Agriculture and Finance Policy committee met Thursday afternoon to hear informational presentations by a University of Minnesota soil health expert and Minnesota Department of Agriculture staff, setting the stage for forthcoming debates over how to address the EPA’s mandate to take further action on nitrate pollution. 

At least since the Legislature convened the Nitrogen Fertilizer Task Force in 1989, the state’s approach to nitrate pollution was to define and encourage “best management practices” for farms in various parts of the state, from the timing of fertilizer application to erosion control efforts and use of cover crops. 

The Minnesota Groundwater Protection Rule, which took effect in 2019, took the best management practices approach one step further, adding a mechanism for the state to mandate adoption of certain practices in narrow cases — only if, after a period of several years, best management practices have been adopted on less than 80% of a drinking water supply area’s cropland, and the nitrate issue in the area is getting worse.

(The rule only covers the state-designated Drinking Water Supply Management Areas, which represent a small percentage of the state’s cropland, but the potential problem is vast: Minnesota farmers planted about 8.5 million acres of corn in 2021, according to the USDA, 15% of the state’s total surface area.)

The EPA letter focused on southeast Minnesota, which is dominated by karst terrain, meaning water — and the nutrients it collects — easily moves between the surface and underground aquifers.

But other areas of the state are also dealing with the downstream effects of fertilizer runoff. 

Many farm industry groups oppose government regulation of fertilizer, and lawmakers including Rep. Steven Jacob, R-Altura, instead want to address the issue by creating additional incentives, like tax credits, for farmers to adopt best management practices (HF4044).

Minnesota already offers assistance to farmers wanting to implement best management practices, including grants and low-interest loan programs, though demand exceeds the funding for those programs, MDA staff said. The state also runs the Minnesota Agricultural Water Quality Certification Program, which certifies producers who take measures to reduce nitrate pollution and prioritizes them in technical and financial assistance programs.

Hansen has seen enough carrots and wants more sticks: He’s proposing a 99-cent fee per ton of nitrogen sold to fund an assistance program for people whose private wells are polluted (HF4135). Under Hansen’s plan, that fee would increase if the amount of fertilizer sold in the state increases.

Minnesota Department of Agriculture Commissioner Thom Petersen was absent from Thursday’s hearing — he is on a trade mission to Cuba, MDA staff said.

Here's the Minnesota House Information Services YouTube of the entire hearing:

The Minnesota Reformer article is republished online under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0.

Screenshot: Representative Hansen, who is a member of the House Ag committee, speaking at the hearing.

Related posts

• The New Lede: Cancer in the corn belt sparks actions to fight farm chemical contamination
• In amicus brief, five ag groups ask to weigh in on ruling that blocked Daley dairy’s expansion plans
• Will MPCA's Clean Water Council recommend unconstitutional use of Legacy funds for mitigation of nitrate contamination of wells??
• State's southeastern Minnesota drinking water fix: grab donuts, coffee, and lobbyists, oh my
• Agency soup: MPCA, DNR, MDH & Ag release "Preventing fish kills in MN driftless region"
• Minnesota nitrate pollution update: raise fertilizer fees to help pay cost of nitrate pollution
• Land Stewardship Project applauds court’s support of Winona County; launches ‘Story Center Powerline’ initiative for rural residents
• Minnesota district court rules against Winona County dairy expansion; owner will appeal
• Agweek Special Report on Rural Health: 10% of MN private wells pose a health problem 
• This is fine: update on MN state agencies' response to EPA letter on karst country nitrates
• Following emergency petition regarding nitrate contamination in SEMN karst region, EPA sees further action needed to protect public health
• On ‘Cancer Road,’ a group of southeastern MN families ask if nitrate exposure is to blame 
• Eleven environmental groups petition EPA on nitrate pollution in Southeast Minnesota wate
• Strib scrutinizes MN Department of Ag action on nitrate-related Groundwater Protection Rule
• Nitrates in Southwestern Minnesota water: 'Do not give the water to infants' in Ellsworth
• Commentary from MinnPost: Can the state control nitrates in Minnesota waters?
• Minnesota Department of Health isn’t properly enforcing drinking water law, and kids will suffer
• is far from over 
• Packed house at Newburg Township on using local control to protect community, karst 
• All citizens are equal, but one thinks he's more equal: massive hog farm shareholder* seeks to prevent August 2 Newburgh Township meeting
• Jean Wagenius: For climate and clean water, state agencies need Walz to lead

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.

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

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

Ten bills in South Dakota legislature: eminent domain is the latest front in carbon pipeline fight

Earlier today, I'd republished ND energy councils recommend carbon capture education consultant to Industrial Commission, from the North Dakota Monitor.

A different state, a different forum, but yet another story on carbon capture politics in the upper Midwest, theis time, the saga of ten bills in the South Dakota Legislature related to eminent domain.

From South Dakota News Watch:

Eminent domain is the latest front in carbon pipeline fight
By Bart Pfankuch

South Dakota lawmakers debating 10 bills this session. 'The core of the issue is about taking people’s lands.'

Some of the most contentious, emotionally charged debates during the 2024 South Dakota legislative session have been about property rights and whether a private company can use eminent domain to force a carbon dioxide pipeline onto land against the owner's will.

The heated discussions are driven by a proposal from Summit Carbon Solutions to run 470 miles of a 1,900-mile underground pipeline across eastern South Dakota. The pipe would carry liquified carbon dioxide gas from regional ethanol plants to North Dakota, where it would be stored deep underground and kept out of the atmosphere.

In all, lawmakers are weighing 10 bills related to the pipeline and eminent domain, which requires landowners to be paid for the use of their land but gives them little legal recourse to stop it.

"The core of the issue is about taking people’s lands, and it's starting to infringe on the American way," Joy Hohn, whose family farm west of Sioux Falls near Hartford is on the proposed pipeline route, told News Watch.

"Prior to this, our eminent domain laws were for projects that were for the good of the people and that benefit the public. But when you have an out-of-state, foreign-backed company using the threat of eminent domain in their dealings, it's not good and people are really fired up about that."

Kirk Yackley, who farms northeast of Pierre near Onida, said he has heard of landowners being bullied but said he had a good experience with Summit representatives.

Yackley is one of the roughly 3 out of 4 South Dakota landowners along the route who have signed voluntary easements allowing the CO2 pipeline on their land, according to Summit. In his case, the line would cut across about a half-mile of his family's 9,000-acre farm.

“They were very professional and respectful,” he said of Summit representatives.

Summit plans to refile for pipeline permit

The state Public Utilities Commission in September rejected Summit's application after regulators said there were too many conflicts between the proposed route and county guidelines for setbacks between utility projects and existing structures.

Summit officials have said they will refile their permit request once they iron out differences and obtain the voluntary easements needed to site the project. They're also supporting a change in state law to eliminate the ability of counties to regulate pipeline locations.

"We continue to work with landowners and community leaders across the state to find a mutually agreeable path," Sabrina Zenor, a spokeswoman for Summit, wrote in an email to News Watch. "We heard the South Dakota PUC's request to work with counties."

Summit hopes to receive voluntary easements from 100% of property owners along the route, she said. The company has secured them from 75% of South Dakotans, and the documents would apply when the company resubmits an application to the state PUC, Zenor wrote.

Voluntary easement rates in other states include 72% in Nebraska, 75% in Iowa, and 90% in North Dakota and Minnesota, she wrote.

Another company, Navigator CO2 Ventures, dropped its proposal for a pipeline in the region, leaving Summit as the only active project. The companies hope to qualify for billions of dollars in federal tax credits aimed at reducing greenhouse gases.

Some scientists question the efficacy and value of carbon capture and sequestration pipelines, arguing the federal subsidies could be used in more proven, efficient ways to reduce climate change.

But supporters said the pipelines will help the atmosphere and provide foundational support to the U.S. ethanol industry and the corn growers who back it.

South Dakota produces $2.9 billion worth of ethanol annually. Summit's plan would collect CO2 from nearly three dozen ethanol plants, including a handful in the state.

Backers also have said the pipeline is a key component of the proposed $1 billion Gevo plant in northeast South Dakota at Lake Preston that would use corn to make biofuels for the airline industry.

Legislator opinion mixed on eminent domain

At one point during this legislative session, the debate over property rights became so emotional that Rep. Steven Duffy, a Rapid City Republican, said he and another lawmaker had to leave the committee hearing together in order to maintain their safety.

Duffy said the temperature of the debate has fallen since then, but concerns among affected landowners remain high.

One of the leading eminent domain opponents, Rep. Jon Hansen, a Dell Rapids Republican, sponsored House Bill 1219, which would prohibit the use of the process specifically for pipelines that would carry carbon dioxide.

"It’s about protection of our people, the people of South Dakota," he said. "It’s about saving South Dakotans from being the subject of hundreds of lawsuits, condemnation lawsuits, simply for owning land and saying no thank you to a purchase offer."

Eminent domain was intended to allow legal taking of private land while also providing appropriate compensation for government projects that serve a public good and not for private companies that seek to turn a profit, Hansen said.

"This bill is about protecting South Dakota landowners' constitutional private property rights from, frankly, the bullying and harassment we have seen inflicted on our people in this state by an out-of-state, for-profit, foreign-backed company over the last year," he said.

A committee rejected the bill by a 7-6 vote, but it was ultimately moved forward without a formal recommendation. It could still be heard on the floor of the House of Representatives through a procedure known as a "smoke out."

Duffy, a member of the House Commerce & Energy Committee, said he opposed the bill to prohibit use of eminent domain for carbon dioxide pipelines because pipeline companies already have invested upwards of $70 million to get their project sited and approved in South Dakota and four other states.

"Whether you should have eminent domain for private industry, that's a different issue. But I don't think it's fair to say we should change the rules now," Duffy said Feb. 17 at a legislative cracker barrel in Rapid City.

Reform of eminent domain laws might be needed, but it sends a negative message to business and industry if the state changes the laws once a development process has begun, he said.

"It probably does need to be looked at down the road. But I think it's not fair to change it right now in the middle of the game," Duffy said. "That sends a signal to other people that South Dakota may not be business friendly. If they followed the rules, and I assume they did ... it's hard for me to say, 'OK, now you can't (use eminent domain.)'"

State vs. local control also part of the debate

Another highly contentious eminent domain bill, Senate Bill 201, would provide a statewide framework for approval of pipeline projects.

The measure was co-sponsored by Senate Majority Leader Casey Crabtree of Madison and House Majority Leader Will Mortensen of Pierre. The two Republicans have said the measure would streamline the pipeline siting process while also providing protections for landowners and financial help for counties where pipelines are laid.

The bill would bar counties from passing structure setback rules that make pipelines virtually impossible within their boundaries but also provide surcharge payments to counties and require companies to pay for damages to landowners.

In a recent newsletter to constituents, Crabtree called the bill a "comprehensive solution that protects landowner rights and establishes clear infrastructure guardrails." 

"South Dakota is open for business, which means we don’t set up roadblocks for projects through regulation, red tape, excessive fees, and indefinite timelines. We provide fairness and certainty in the process for landowners and businesses," Crabtree wrote.

And yet, the measure faces opposition from many landowners who said it would eliminate local control and the ability of individual counties to regulate and possibly ban pipelines within their borders.

A few counties, including Brown, Lincoln and McPherson, have passed or considered measures that would ban pipelines or enforce setback rules that could make the pipelines unfeasible within their borders.

"It's stripping away local control," Hohn said. "It would take away county ordinances that were put in place by a handful of counties that took great care to make sure the intelligent land use and economic development was looked at for their long-range plans."

Some landowners unify in opposition

Craig Schaunaman, a former lawmaker whose Brown County farm is on the Summit pipeline route, said he was subject to eminent domain and condemnation proceedings after Summit sought to build the CO2 pipeline across 2.5 miles of his grain farm south of Aberdeen.

Summit representatives did not share his "South Dakota values" and did not deal with him in good faith, he said. As many as 200 South Dakota landowners are or have faced eminent domain proceedings due to their opposition to the pipeline project, Schaunaman said.

"South Dakota has always had an open door for business, but what we haven’t always been is for sale," he said. "It’s our land. And I think if it goes beyond the government taking it, I should be able to say yes or no. Now we seem to have changed that direction and anybody who wants an economic benefit can come in, condemn the land and take it. And philosophically I can't agree with that."

Some landowners opposed to the pipeline said it can make their land difficult to farm and also brings health risks associated with possible leaks of the toxic, liquified CO2.

A number of them have organized.

They regularly drive to hearings in Pierre and have formed a group called Landowners for Eminent Domain Reform. They also created a website to share stories of how they have willingly allowed government use of their land for public projects but believe using eminent domain for business is against South Dakota values. Some have shared that they are enduring sleepless nights as they said they battle to protect their land and livelihoods.

"If you want to stand up for what is rightfully yours, it’s very time consuming and a financial burden," Hohn told News Watch.

According to the Institute for Justice, a nonprofit legal group that monitors eminent domain cases nationwide, the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution allows for eminent domain only for “public use” and with compensation provided to the property owner. But the institute notes that a 2005 U.S. Supreme Court case, Kelo V. New London, expands eminent domain to allow government and even private entities to use eminent domain for projects that will produce more taxes or new jobs.

The institute gives South Dakota an A grade due to a 2006 state Supreme Court ruling regarding the right of a landowner to prevent hunters from accessing their land that the institute believes weakened the applicability of the Kelo ruling in South Dakota.

The president of one of South Dakota‘s largest agricultural groups, Doug Sombke of the South Dakota Farmers Union, said the public at large should be concerned that under current eminent domain laws, their personal property including land, homes and even cars could be taken without consent by private companies seeking a profit.

"This is not just a farmland issue. This is real for every South Dakotan who owns anything because this can happen to your home, business or any property you own," he said. "Somebody can come in for private gain, a for-profit business, and they could literally come in and wipe our your whole neighborhood and the only alternative you have is to determine what that property was worth."

Farmer had good experience with Summit

Yackley, the Sully County farmer who signed a voluntary easement with Summit, said company representatives who visited with him answered his questions and made some concessions during the easement negotiation process.

He said he isn’t sure of the value and efficacy of the carbon capture process, but he believes the pipeline will help protect the state ethanol industry while boosting the overall state agricultural economy.

Yackley said he received a settlement that would pay him significantly higher than market value for the land where the pipeline would be built.

He testified in 2023 before the Legislature in favor of the Summit project but doesn’t begrudge any landowner of their right to deny Summit access to their land or their ability to say no to the company.

“I have two neighbors who are dead set against the pipeline,” Yackley said. “And I told them to go ahead, that it’s their right to fight it.”

Yackley also said he has heard from people he knows well that Summit representatives did pressure them to allow the pipeline on their land.

“I’ve got friends up north that I trust, and they tell me they were bullied (by Summit). And I believe them because they had no reason to lie to me,” he said. “We just didn’t have that, and I’m sorry that they did.”

This South Dakota News Watch article is reprinted with permission.

Map: This map provides a close-up look at the route of the proposed Summit Carbon Solutions CO2 pipeline through the state of South Dakota. (Image: Courtesy South Dakota PUC/ South Dakota News Watch).

Related posts

• ND energy councils recommend carbon capture education consultant to Industrial Commission
• Summit Carbon Solutions denied conditional use permit for pipeline in Northeast Nebraska county
• Another attempt to block ethanol carbon pipelines from using eminent domain fails
• Commentary: Oil pipeline experience proves need for caution with carbon pipelines
• Navigator CO2 Ventures survivor Poet shifts to remaining carbon dioxide pipeline proposal
• Burying the lede: EIS points out improved farming methods & ethanol plants would reduce as much carbon as ethanol carbon pipelines
• MInnesota Department of Commerce releases draft EIS for Otter Tail to Wilkin Carbon Dioxide Pipeline Project; public meetings coming up in Breckenridge & Fergus Falls
• Hundreds of CO2 pipeline critics converged on South Dakota Capitol ahead of legislative session
• CCS squabble: CO2 pipeline debate has resulted in divisions among SD ethanol proponents
• Keystone I pipeline leaks again; after 2017 South Dakota & 2019 North Dakota, Kansas is hit 
• Keystone I pipeline leaks again--this time in ND
• TransCanada's state-of-art pipeline bums out SD utilities comish after 3 leaks in under 10 years
• Sisseton-Wahpeton Oyate concerned about Keystone I Pipeline oil spill in NE 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. 

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

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

ND energy councils recommend carbon capture education consultant to Industrial Commission

Update 2/22 11:57: The Bismarck Tribune has published a North Dakota News Cooperative article by Michael Standaert that's a good companion piece to the North Dakota Monitor piece below. He reports in Carbon capture potential hot button issue for 2024 election cycle:

Political decisions on carbon capture are making strange bedfellows in North Dakota.

From environmental rights activists on the left, to property rights advocates on the right, a motley coalition has formed to push back against efforts to build a pipeline to pump carbon dioxide from ethanol plants across the Midwest to store deep below the ground in central North Dakota.

A new North Dakota Poll released Feb. 20 found that only 16% of eligible voters in the state believe capturing CO2 will reduce the impacts of climate change. Another 40% are unsure, and 27% believe it won’t work. The poll was conducted by WPA Intelligence in Washington, D.C., for the North Dakota News Cooperative.

Looking ahead toward the election cycle in November, the questions around whether it is an appropriate climate change solution and whether North Dakotans support CO2 pipelines and other efforts to capture and store carbon dioxide appear set to become even more contentious. . . .

Read the entire article at the Tribune. [end update]

Years ago, Bluestem first explored the connections between North Dakota energy councils and the state's Industrial Commission in a post Horse hockey: who's pushing the puck for new Coalition for a Secure Energy Future TV ad?

Since then, the marketing program has popped up in subsequent posts like  Fact check: is the Coalition for a Secure Energy Future "hard hat labor" lobbying group? Well, no.and  Climate action digest: North Dakota dollars continue to fight Minnesota clean energy future.

 

Now it looks like ethanol carbon pipelines--which are encountering popular resistance across the Upper Midwest--is going to get a popular opinion marketing boost from the state of North Dakota, which may go down the same road with a different crew.

 

Because the peasants so need to be "educated" about carbon capture.

From the North Dakota Monitor:

Carbon education consultant recommended; critic sees effort as government lobbying 
By Jeff Beach

A campaign to educate the public about carbon capture advanced through a selection process Wednesday, but one environmental group questions why state government is backing the effort. 

A group of North Dakota energy councils on Wednesday recommended that Bismarck-based AE2S Communications be awarded a $300,000 contract to help educate people in the state about how carbon dioxide emissions can be captured and stored and potential uses for carbon. 

The North Dakota Industrial Commission will vote on the recommendation Feb. 27. 

AE2S was one of two firms that submitted proposals for the $300,000 grant, presenting what it called a strategic communications and marketing plan to be finalized by the end of the year. 

AE2S was approved by votes from three state energy councils – the Lignite Research Council, the Oil and Gas Research Council and the Renewable Energy Council. The councils receive their funding from taxes paid by the energy industry. AE2S was selected over Public Affairs Company of Minneapolis. 

The AE2S presentation to those groups highlighted using the Western Dakota Energy Association, which represents local governments, and Fargo-based Fieldstone Group, co-owned by conservative talk radio host and columnist Scott Hennen. 

Other partners identified were the Energy and Environmental Research Center at the University Dakota and North Dakota State University Extension. 

David Ripplinger is a bioenergy economist with North Dakota State University Extension. He wrote a letter of support for the AE2S proposal to help people in the state understand the topic through “science-based education.” 

He said the carbon capture topic is controversial, especially with some landowners faced with the possibility of a hazardous liquid pipeline on their property. 

“It’s delicate, but it is an important issue to the state, to agriculture, to rural communities, to everybody in the state,” Ripplinger said in an interview. “So even though it can be touchy, it doesn’t mean it’s not important, it doesn’t mean that there shouldn’t be education.”

He said education is one thing, but promotion is another. 

“It’s not our job to promote things,” he said. 

Agriculture has a tie to carbon capture and storage through the ethanol industry and the farmers who grow corn to supply the ethanol plants.

Two North Dakota ethanol plants are already pumping carbon into underground storage – Red Trail Energy at Richardton and Blue Flint Ethanol at Underwood.  

A controversial carbon capture pipeline proposal by Summit Carbon Solutions would link ethanol plants in five states – including one plant in North Dakota – to an underground storage site northwest of Bismarck. 

Scott Skokos is the executive director of the Dakota Resource Council, which is helping organize landowners who oppose the Summit pipeline, citing issues such as safety and damage to property values and cropland. 

Even though the money for the education effort is coming from the energy industry, he says government shouldn’t be involved. 

“You’re taking tax dollars and doing the job of private industry,” Skokos said. 

He said the public generally puts more trust in government sources than from private industry, and this is the energy industry taking advantage of that government trust. 

“This, essentially, is the state lobbying for carbon capture,” he said. 

The Summit project was not mentioned in the Wednesday meeting. 

Summit’s application for a pipeline route with the North Dakota Public Service Commission says the carbon it captures is specified for permanent sequestration in Mercer and Oliver counties. But Summit also has said the pipeline could be used to transport CO2 for enhanced oil recovery. 

Some in the oil and gas industry see enhanced oil recovery as key to keep North Dakota’s oil and gas industry humming in the future, though the technology to use it in the Bakken oil formation is still being tested, according to North Dakota geologist Kathy Neset. 

There are other industrial uses for carbon dioxide, including in construction materials and carbonated drinks. 

There also are federal tax credits as incentives for carbon storage and utilization. 

A public opinion poll released Tuesday by the North Dakota News Cooperative that included questions about the benefits of carbon capture on the environment showed that 40% of North Dakotans have yet to form an opinion on the issue. 

Skokos said from looking at the details of the poll, as well as anecdotal evidence, that people in areas outside of the Summit pipeline corridor are largely undecided. 

“Some people are very well informed,” Skokos said, including pipeline opponents.

Summit says it has about 80% of the voluntary easements it needs in North Dakota but has fallen behind its original project timeline of being operational in 2024. The company is still working on obtaining permits, including in North Dakota. 

“I thought that the path to permitting and construction and operation would have gone a bit smoother,” Ripplinger said of carbon capture pipelines. “Obviously that hasn’t happened.”

This North Dakota Monitor article is republished online under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0.

Photo: The Tharaldson Ethanol plant at Casselton is the only ethanol plant in the state of North Dakota that is part of the Summit Carbon Solutions pipeline project. The North Dakota Industrial Commission will consider at its next meeting a recommendation for a carbon capture educational program. (Jeff Beach/North Dakota Monitor).

Related posts

•  Climate action digest: North Dakota dollars continue to fight Minnesota clean energy future 
• DeSmogBlog on Project Tundra: expensive greenwashing for fossil fuel
• Fact check: is the Coalition for a Secure Energy Future "hard hat labor" lobbying group? Well, no
• Is putting a smile on Tom Bakk's face the best thing ND lignite research fund has ever done?
• ND state/lignite industry partnership continues funding for Coalition for Secure Energy Future
• North Dakota's coal marketing campaign to give lignite sales pitch at MN electric co-op offices
• Horse hockey: who's pushing the puck for new Coalition for a Secure Energy Future TV ad?

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. 

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

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

Since then, the marketing program has popped up in subsequent posts like  Fact check: is the Coalition for a Secure Energy Future "hard hat labor" lobbying group? Well, no.and  Climate action digest: North Dakota dollars continue to fight Minnesota clean energy future.

 

Now it looks like ethanol carbon pipelines--which are encountering popular resistance across the Upper Midwest--is going to get a popular opinion marketing boost from the state of North Dakota, which may go down the same road with a different crew.

 

Because the peasants so need to be "educated" about carbon capture.

Would bottle deposit solve Minnesota’s waste problem? Or just nickel-and-dime consumers?

Earlier today, I mistakenly republished a February 20 Session Daily article as if it had covered a hearing in the Minnesota House Environment and Natural Resources Finance and Policy Committee today, February 21. I goofed (gotta watch that blood sugar when I do a cut and paste).

Both are worth republishing.

Here's the Session Daily coverage for the hearing today.

Would bottle deposit solve Minnesota’s waste problem? Or just nickel-and-dime consumers?
By Margaret Stevens

Recycling rates have plateaued and literally tons of valuable materials are going directly into landfills.

One route to encourage recycling is a so-called “bottle bill,” which would require a nominal deposit for each bottle or can purchased. Consumers get their money back when the container is returned.

People would buy the beverage, but borrow the bottle, said Rep. Sydney Jordan (DFL-Mpls).

She sponsors HF3200, which would establish a bottle deposit and return system in Minnesota beginning in two years.

The bill, as amended, was laid over Wednesday by the House Environment and Natural Resources Finance and Policy Committee.

[MORE: View many letters of support, concerns]

Ten states have a bottle bill, starting with Oregon in 1971 and most recently in Hawaii in 2002. Many were enacted before curbside recycling was available. Almost all the states with a bottle bill have gone on to expand the variety of containers covered by the deposit.

Bill supporters say deposits are a proven method of greatly increasing recycling.

In Minnesota, about half of all recyclable beverage containers are going into landfills and incinerators, causing air and water pollution, Jordan said. “This bill will do something to stop this.”

Research indicates deposits are effective ­— beverage container recycling is two or three times greater in states with a deposit than in the states without. Some European countries have a 90% return rate on bottles.

Under the proposed legislation, deposits would begin July 1, 2026, at 5 cents for containers of 24 fluid ounces or less and 10 cents for containers holding more. Those amounts would increase starting in 2030 to 10 cents for smaller containers and 15 cents for larger.

Liquids not subject to the program would include milk, infant formula, meal replacement drinks and medications.

Retailers would not be required to redeem bottles, but there would be incentives to do so. Bottles could be returned in standardized bags at kiosks or mobile return vehicles.

The Pollution Control Agency would be responsible for setting convenience standards. The redemption program itself would be operated by a stewardship organization, funded by beverage distributors and importers.

Proponents say bottle bills are the best, and possibly only way, to reach the state’s recycling goals as well as the best way to build a system to reuse containers.

However, opponents counter that Minnesota is seventh in the nation in recycling, ahead of some states with deposit systems. They say that a bottle bill would divert energy and resources from existing recycling programs. 

“My fear is this will disrupt a very good system,” said Rep. Steven Jacob (R-Altura).  

Additionally, opponents say a bottle bill would put undue burdens on consumers, who could see beverage costs increase, could need to sort and store dirty bottles and may have to travel miles to redeem their bottles.

Redeeming bottles would be especially burdensome for bars and restaurants, said representatives of the hospitality industry.

Here's the video of the bill's hearing:

Photo: Kate Bailey, chief policy officer at The Association of Plastic Recyclers, testifies Feb. 21 in support of a bill sponsored by Rep. Sydney Jordan, right, that would establish a beverage container recycling refunds program. (Photo by Andrew VonBank/Session Daily).

Related posts

•  "Packaging Waste and Cost Reduction Act” could shift costs from consumers to producers 
•  $100m proposal to replace all lead water service lines within decade gains 1st MNHouse approval

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. 

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

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

"Packaging Waste and Cost Reduction Act” could shift costs from consumers to producers

Note: this was originally republished as if the hearing had taken placed on February 21; incorrect: it happened on February 20; My apologies to my readers.

Quite the lively testimony in the Minnesota House Environment and Natural Resources Finance and Policy Committee this yesterday afternoon, Wherever one might stand on this bill, the YouTube of the hearing embedded below certainly demonstrates that neither side of the discussion was stifled.

From Session Daily:

Packaging waste costs could be delivered from consumers to producers
By Margaret Stevens

Minnesota has a waste problem made worse by unnecessary plastic packaging, according to Rep. Sydney Jordan (DFL-Mpls). And consumers and taxpayers pay the price, not only through fees to pick up and dispose of waste, but through the health impact of incinerators and leaking landfills.

Jordan has proposed a solution in the form of HF3577, the so-called “Packaging Waste and Cost Reduction Act,” which would make producers responsible for the packaging waste they create.

The bill would create a statewide program financed by producers that aims to reduce waste generation through reduction, reuse, recycling, and composting. It would also provide “for negotiation and execution of agreements to collect, transport, and process used covered materials for reuse, recycling, and composting.”

The bill, as amended, was approved on a 9-7 vote by the House Environment and Natural Resources Finance and Policy Committee Tuesday and sent to the House Commerce Finance and Policy Committee.

It would create an extended producer responsibility program, like ones used in Canada and many European countries. Similar programs are currently being implemented in four U.S. states.  

In Maine, which approved such a program in 2021, producers pay into a fund based on the amount and recyclability of their packaging.

The aim in Minnesota, said Jordan, is to take the existing recycling system and ensure its success by shifting the more costs to producers.

The first stages would be creating an advisory board, appointed by the Pollution Control Agency, to set goals and establishing a producer responsibility organization to implement a plan to meet them.

An assessment performed by the agency would look at things such as cost, availability of recycling, investments needed, and a variety of other factors. 

By March 1, 2028, the producer responsibility organization would submit a stewardship plan with performance targets, collection methods, proposed exemptions due to health and safety concerns, source reduction measures, recycling and reuse, budget and funding needs, producers fees, and an explanation of how the program will be paid for by producers.

By 2032, all packaging would have to be reusable, recyclable, compostable or part of an approved collection system.

Dozens of testifiers submitted written testimony for and against the bill.

Supporters say it would increase recycling rates, reduce single-use plastic and reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

However, many oppose the bill in general as something that could disrupt a relatively successful system currently in place.

Others took issue with some of the specifics such as the composition of the advisory board or inclusion of some industries, which they feel should be excluded due to health or safety reasons.

Here's the video of the hearing:

Photo: Ramsey County Commissioner Victoria Reinhardt testifies before the House Environment and Natural Resources Finance and Policy Committee Feb. 20 in support of HF3577, sponsored by Rep. Sydney Jordan, right. (Photo by Andrew VonBank/Session Daily).

 

Related post

•  $100m proposal to replace all lead water service lines within decade gains 1st MNHouse approval

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. 

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

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

Summit Carbon Solutions denied conditional use permit for pipeline in Northeast Nebraska county

Apparently, commissioners n Stanton County, Nebraska, weren't impressed by Summit Carbon Solutions' plan for an ethanol carbon pipeline in their neighborhood.

From the Nebraska Examiner:

Northeast Nebraska county delivers blow to plans for carbon pipeline
By Paul Hammel

Stanton County denial would require Summit Carbon Solutions to reapply for conditional use permit

LINCOLN — A rural Nebraska county delivered a blow Tuesday to plans by an Iowa corporation to build a pipeline carrying carbon dioxide across the state.

On a 3-0 vote, the Stanton County Board denied a conditional use permit for Summit Carbon Solutions, which is seeking to build a CO2 pipeline from more than 50 ethanol plants in the Midwest to a sequestration site in North Dakota.

Stanton County Clerk Wanda Heermann said commissioners stated that they needed more information about the health risks and possible foreign ownership of the company and that they wanted to see more public education and consideration of alternative routes.

Summit, Heermann said, would have to reapply for a conditional use permit if it wants to cross the northeast Nebraska county.

No one testified for the project

One Stanton County landowner who opposes the project noted that not one landowner testified in favor of the pipeline prior to the county board’s vote Tuesday.

“I want it to be advertised that counties, or at least one, as of now was presented with this decision and denied it — unanimously denied,” said Justin Kennedy, a member of an opposition group, the Nebraska Easement Action Team. It is a wing of the Bold Alliance, which led the opposition to the crude-oil Keystone XL pipeline.

A Summit spokeswoman said the company “respects the decision of the Stanton County Commissioners and will address their feedback.”

“More than 90% of the landowners in Stanton County have signed voluntary easement agreements, demonstrating broad understanding and support of the project,” said spokeswoman Sabrina Ahmed Zenor.

Dakota County delays vote

Also Tuesday, the Dakota County Planning and Zoning Commission tabled until April a decision on whether to recommend approval of a county conditional use permit for Summit. Commissioners said they needed more information, according to Joe O’Neill, the county’s zoning administrator.

Last fall, Summit Carbon Solutions announced it was postponing its project until 2026 because of opposition to the $5.5 billion, 2,000-mile CO2 pipeline. It is the largest carbon pipeline being proposed in the region and would pass through Iowa, North and South Dakota and Minnesota, as well as Nebraska.

Proponents of corn-based ethanol have touted the plan to capture and sequester CO2 produced by ethanol plants as a way to make the fuel more environmentally friendly and ensure a market for the fuel into the future. Billions in federal funds have been set aside to help capture the greenhouse gases.

Pipeline rupture in 2020

Opponents have questioned the safety of the high-pressure, liquid pipeline, pointing to a pipeline rupture in Satartia, Mississippi, in 2020 that caused an evacuation and sent several people to the hospital. Questions have also been raised about whether the technology of sequestering carbon in deep underground formations is sound.

Opposition has been especially strong in Iowa and South Dakota.

In a press release, Bold Alliance said one of the Stanton County commissioners, Doug Huttman, asked Summit at Tuesday’s meeting for a model of how CO2 would disperse and flow in the event of a rupture.

Nebraska has no state regulations concerning carbon pipelines, but counties that have zoning ordinances require companies to obtain conditional use permits to build in that county.

This Nebraska Examiner article is republished online under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. 

Map: Summit Carbon Solutions plans to build a 2,000-mile network of CO2 pipelines across the Midwest to capture carbon produced by ethanol plants and then sequester it underground in North Dakota. (Courtesy of Summit Carbon Solutions/ Nebraska Examiner).

Related posts

• Another attempt to block ethanol carbon pipelines from using eminent domain fails
• Commentary: Oil pipeline experience proves need for caution with carbon pipelines
• Navigator CO2 Ventures survivor Poet shifts to remaining carbon dioxide pipeline proposal
• Burying the lede: EIS points out improved farming methods & ethanol plants would reduce as much carbon as ethanol carbon pipelines
• MInnesota Department of Commerce releases draft EIS for Otter Tail to Wilkin Carbon Dioxide Pipeline Project; public meetings coming up in Breckenridge & Fergus Falls
• Hundreds of CO2 pipeline critics converged on South Dakota Capitol ahead of legislative session
• CCS squabble: CO2 pipeline debate has resulted in divisions among SD ethanol proponents
• Keystone I pipeline leaks again; after 2017 South Dakota & 2019 North Dakota, Kansas is hit 
• Keystone I pipeline leaks again--this time in ND
• TransCanada's state-of-art pipeline bums out SD utilities comish after 3 leaks in under 10 years
• Sisseton-Wahpeton Oyate concerned about Keystone I Pipeline oil spill in NE 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. 

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

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

A tale of two headlines: $120 million one-time EMS funding bill introduced in MN legislature

Two headlines about the EMS crisis in rural Minnesota  captured my attention this week.

At MinnPost on Tuesday, Ava Kian reported Greater Minnesota cities seek funding for EMS delivery, infrastructure in ’24 session.

She begins:

Two organizations that represent Minnesota cities outside the Twin Cities region hope the Legislature will address several challenges facing their member cities, including stress on Emergency Medical Systems and infrastructure needs. 

The Coalition of Greater Minnesota Cities and the League of Minnesota Cities, whose requests often overlap, are asking that funding for those two areas be included in this year’s bonding bill. 

Funding for EMS

One of those requests is for around $120 million to help EMS programs function. 

“Over the last two years, our communities have been literally ringing alarm bells about the fragility of the system,” Bradley Peterson, CGMC’s executive director, said during a Zoom call about the organization’s legislative priorities. “Reimbursements from Medicare and Medicaid and private insurance are simply not keeping up with the services provided. The fee-for-service model is, frankly, in many of our communities, not sustainable.”  .  . .

There’s currently an EMS task force in the Legislature. Last week, the task force met and discussed challenges with reimbursement rates. Grant Hauschild, DFL-Hermantown, said at the task force meeting that the problem is uniquely affecting rural areas because in areas that don’t have private EMS systems, the responsibility of paying for licensing falls on cities.

“I do think that this is a distinctly rural challenge … from a financial perspective it feels like the weight is on our rural communities,” he said. “There is certainly a short-term crisis that we need to figure out – my hope is this session – at least for some of those most targeted areas where this is a big crisis.”  . . .

Bluestem suspects that something was missing from the Zoom call. 

On  Monday, Forum Communications' capitol press staffer Mark Wasson reported in Rural DFLers propose $120 million to fund struggling EMS in Greater Minnesota:

A one-time, $120 million grant is proposed to help close a funding gap for emergency medical services across Greater Minnesota.

The bill, SF 3886, was introduced and had its first reading on Monday, Feb. 19. It was referred to the Senate Taxes Committee. Co-authors of the bill are Sen. Grant Hauschild, DFL-Hermantown, and Sen. Robert Kupec, DFL-Moorhead.

EMS providers across the state have been put in a financial hole due to Medicare and Medicaid only partially funding services, Hauschild said.

"The truth is, if we had a fix at the federal level on reimbursement rates, we would not be in this crisis," he said. He said he expects the bill to be a starting point to address the needs of EMS providers across the state.

The $120 million would bring those services back to square one but further funding and fixes at the state and federal level are needed. Low pay, employee retention and insufficient federal reimbursement have left much of Greater Minnesota with unacceptably slow emergency response times — up to 90 minutes in some places.. . .

It's behind a subscribers-only paywall, so maybe MinnPost missed it. While I'm used to MinnPost using stock photos of livestock that don't match dairy cows milked by particular producers covering, this omission seems to be a bit more derelict.

Chief author of HF3992, the House companion bill, is Dave Lislegard, DFL-Aurora; it's a bipartisan bill with twelve authors, eight Republicans and four DFLers.

Will the bill become law? Hauschild expressed some reservations to the Forum Communications' reporter:

. . . While the funding is badly needed in Greater Minnesota, Hauschild said he is not sure if the bill will pass, given it is not a budget year and the bill is a stop-gap measure.

"At the end of the day, we have to figure out a more sustainable structure for consistent funding and reforms that make (EMS) more efficient and effective," he said.

Bluestem hopes Hauschild is incorrect and the Minnesota legislature comes up with the money.

Photo: A Browns Valley, Minn. ambulance./ Browns Valley Ambulance/Facebook via Minn. EMS task force begins work on community feedback.

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.

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

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

 

Future Fund, now controlled by SD governor, may soon require legislative oversight

Bluestem's been following the discussion of the Future Fund, now under the sole control of the Office of the Governor of South Dakota.

At South Dakota Searchlight, there's news of a potential change in that situation.

Fund controlled by governor may soon require legislative oversight
By Joshua Haiar

Responding to recent controversy about a fund controlled exclusively by the Governor’s Office, a committee of lawmakers endorsed a bill Tuesday that would require greater oversight of the spending. 

“I think this is a good attempt to respond to a concern that’s out there,” said Sen. Lee Schoenbeck, R-Watertown.

The South Dakota Senate Commerce and Energy Committee endorsed the bill 7-1. It now heads to the full Senate. 

The bill is an amended version of earlier, failed legislation that would have reduced the amount of money flowing to the Future Fund. The fund gets its money from a tax on employers, and the governor has exclusive authority in state law to spend Future Fund dollars on research and economic development. Unlike other funds administered by the Governor’s Office of Economic Development, Future Fund expenses don’t go through a board of citizen appointees for vetting or approval. 

The new version of the bill would require the Governor’s Office of Economic Development to provide quarterly reports to legislative committees, detailing each award or grant from the fund. The reports would include the recipient’s name, amount, location, the research or economic development purpose, the economic impact measures, and the number of jobs created or retained.

Noem’s uses of the Future Fund last year included $2.5 million for a Governor’s Cup rodeo in Sioux Falls and $5 million for Noem’s “Freedom Works Here” workforce recruitment campaign, which stars her in a series of advertisements. The latter also came under scrutiny for allegations that the politically connected Ohio firm chosen to conduct the campaign stole the idea for it from a South Dakota firm. 

The commissioner of the Governor’s Office of Economic Development, Chris Schilken, defended the governor’s use of the fund during a hearing on the prior version of the bill earlier this month. On Friday, he stepped down from his leadership position to take a subordinate role in the office, citing a desire to spend more time with his family.

According to the state Department of Labor and Regulation, 28,261 employers paid $23 million into the Future Fund in 2022, which equated to an average of $814 per employer. Governors can spend as much or as little from the fund as they want, and legislators have altered the contribution rates over the years, so the balance fluctuates. Noem distributed $30.34 million from the fund last year.

This South Dakota Searchlight article is republished online under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0.

Photo: Governor Kristi Noem rides, with American flag in hand, into the Cinch Playoffs Governor’s Cup rodeo, underwritten by the Future Fubd, in Sioux Falls in September 2023. (Courtesy of Governor’s Office/ South Dakota Searchlight).

Related posts

• In Freedom Works Here inquiry, former official says Go West Media/Strategy Group was ‘obvious’ favorite for Noem ad campaign
• ‘Governor’s Cup’ rodeo among recipients of millions from public fund controlled by Noem
• State discussed Freedom Works Here plan with winning firms before opening project for bids
• 66-year-old guy touted in September press release from SD governor’s office might not be best Freedom Works Here recruitment example
• Work, We're On It: Freedom Works Here ads scrutinized, Ohio vendor swiped local idea
• Transparent Positive Pants Governor Noem tried to avoid ethics hearing, seal records
• Positive pants on fire: Democratic opponent Jamie Smith corrects Noem's really bad math
• Future Fund, COVID-19, indigenous land & wildfires: notes on Mt Rushmore fireworks show

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.

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

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

MNHouse committee advances bill to ban ‘reprehensible’ buying, selling of human bones

Last year, I accompanied Sisseton Wahpeton Oyate members who were bringing the remains of two boys--who had died and been buried at the Carlisle Indian School many years before--to join over 2000 tribal members' remains who had been returned to the tribes' repatriation grounds.

Most of the relatives' had come decades ago from the Smithsonian.

I agree with the spirit of this legislation moving forward in Minnesota. 

From Session Daily:

Committee advances bill to ban ‘reprehensible’ buying and selling of human bones
By Tim Walker

“You could walk into an oddities shop not that far from here, today, and buy a human skull.”

With that opening, speaking Monday before the House Commerce Finance and Policy Committee, Rep. Jamie Becker-Finn (DFL-Roseville) described a bill she sponsors that would make it a felony to buy and sell human bones, including containers of cremated or hydrolyzed human remains.

It is currently legal to do so in Minnesota, she said, which “is simply just against our own sense of morality and respect for other human beings [and] the dignity we believe anyone should be treated with both in life and death.”

As a Native American, Becker-Finn said she has a personal connection to this topic.

“There is a long history of Native remains and bones being displayed, sold, brokered, and otherwise used for, I guess, entertainment,” she said. “Obviously, I find that commodification of a human being reprehensible.”

The committee approved HF3490 and sent it to the House Public Safety Finance and Policy Committee.

Exceptions are provided, including licensed health care professionals at educational institutions with “legitimate medical or scientific purposes or for educational purposes.”

And law enforcement agencies, search and rescue units, and emergency management organizations could obtain remains “to conduct search and rescue training or to train dogs to locate dead human bodies.”

Representing the Minnesota Funeral Directors Association, Joe Sellwood said the buying and selling of human bones “goes against our customs, which is dignity in death.”

It is imperative that Minnesota enact this ban, he said.

“Absent a bright line, there remains a quiet but open market for the buying and selling of human remains gathered as morbid collectibles or used for questionable purposes,” he said.

Becker-Finn hopes her bill becomes law before the traveling Oddities & Curiosities Expo comes to the Minneapolis Convention Center May 18-19. Event organizers have previously promoted the sale of “all things weird,” including skulls and bones.

Photo: Rep. Jamie Becker-Finn testifies before the House Commerce Finance and Policy Committee Feb. 19 in support of a bill she sponsors that would prohibit the sale of calcified human remains for commercial purposes. (Photo by Andrew VonBank/ Session Daily).

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.

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

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

 

South Dakota campaign finance reports detail money raised by ballot question committees

A solid look at where the money is coming from and being spent by committees for and against this election year's batch of ballot questions, from South Dakota Searchlight.

Open primaries effort attracts big contributions from South Dakotans and Colorado group
By Joshua Haiar

An ongoing effort to create open primary elections received some big contributions from South Dakotans in 2023, and also received a little more than half of its donations from a Colorado-based political action committee funded in large part by a Georgia billionaire, according to recently filed campaign finance reports.

“Our open primaries effort in South Dakota has caught the attention of many groups nationally,” said Joe Kirby, a leader of the open primaries effort, in an emailed statement.

The Colorado PAC is Unite America. It raised $3.67 million in 2023, according to its federal campaign finance reports. Its biggest contributor was Arthur Blank, co-founder of the Home Depot and owner of the NFL’s Atlanta Falcons, who gave the group $1 million. That was one of seven individual contributions of $200,000 or more that Unite America received last year.

Unite America gave contributions totaling $451,150 to the South Dakota Open Primaries ballot question committee. The committee, which received $818,000 in total contributions in 2023, is circulating petitions to place a measure on statewide ballots Nov. 5 that would establish top-two primaries for gubernatorial, congressional, legislative and county races. Candidates for each office would run in an open primary, regardless of their party affiliation.

“Unite America is an organization which advocates for election reform around the country,” Kirby said. “They are funded by individuals who believe that election reforms like open primaries and ranked choice voting will improve the quality of politics in America.”

South Dakota’s primary elections are currently split by political party. Democrats allow the state’s nearly 150,000 independents and non-politically affiliated voters to vote in their primaries, but Republicans do not. Republicans dominate general elections and hold every statewide office, while Democrats hold only 11 of the state’s 105 legislative seats. Kirby has said the primary system “discourages competition, encourages hyper partisanship and excludes hundreds of thousands of voters.”

The committee’s state campaign finance report for 2023 shows it also received large donations from a group of Sioux Falls residents, among other, smaller individual contributions. The large contributions included a combined $82,500 from David and Deanna Knudson; a combined $80,000 from Joe and Jennifer Kirby; $50,000 apiece from Tom Heinz, Dan Kirby and Drey Samuelson; and $25,000 from John Fiksdahl.

Unspecified “consulting” costs of $657,000 constituted most of the committee’s expenditures. The committee started 2023 with about $45,000 and ended it with a balance of about $204,000.

Unlike some other states, South Dakota’s campaign finance laws and rules allow disclosures such as “consulting” without specific information revealing who was paid and for what. 

The open primaries group is just one of the South Dakota ballot question committees that recently submitted required year-end campaign finance reports. 

According to their reports, the committees raised a combined total of $1.25 million and spent $1.12 million last year. In the early stages of a ballot question campaign, expenses may include paying petition circulators to gather the thousands of signatures needed from registered voters to place a question on the ballot.

Supporters of eight potential ballot questions are circulating petitions. Additionally, the Legislature has exercised its authority to place one measure on the ballot.

There are no limits on contributions to ballot question committees in South Dakota.

Following are summaries of the campaign finance reports from committees with significant financial activity in 2023.

Dakotans for Health

Dakotans for Health is the committee circulating ballot measures that would reestablish abortion rights in South Dakota and repeal the state sales tax on food.

The group’s campaign finance report for 2023 shows about $185,000 in donations, including $119,706 from individual contributions. The biggest individual donations were $5,000 apiece from Elizabeth Zieglmeier, of Rapid City; Stan Adelstein, of Rapid City; Evelyne Rozner, of Seattle; Vincent Ryan, of Boston; and Susan Cullman, of Stamford, Connecticut.

The organization started the year with about $96,000 and spent about $249,000. Expenses included $167,000 on consulting, $44,000 on salaries, and $1,950 on advertising. The group’s ending balance was about $32,000. 

Dakotans for Health’s fundraising included a $55,000 contribution from another committee, Takeitback.Org-Advocacy. Democratic political activist and former congressional candidate Rick Weiland is the chair and treasurer of both Takeitback.org and Dakotans for Health.

Committees are not required to disclose the names of contributors who donate $100 or less. Takeitback.org’s report shows $33,845 worth of those contributions and $23,559 of individual contributions of more than $100 from people in multiple states. 

Life Defense Fund

The Life Defense Fund is the group encouraging South Dakotans to “decline to sign” the abortion rights ballot petitions, hoping to prevent the measure from getting on the ballot. 

The group’s campaign finance report shows about $211,000 in income, including $87,931 from entities such as local or regional right-to-life committees. 

Another $28,000 came from individuals who gave $100 or less, and $92,000 came from individuals who gave more than $100. 

The biggest individual donation came from Adam and Joy Broin of Sioux Falls, who gave $5,050. 

The committee spent about $209,0000, including $61,000 on advertising and $120,000 on consulting. The committee started 2023 with about $17,000 and ended with about $19,000.

Marijuana

Petitions are circulating for two marijuana-related measures. One proposes to legalize a limited form of recreational adult marijuana use, possession and distribution. The other would repeal the state’s existing medical marijuana program.

The Grow South Dakota Ballot Committee raised about $24,000. The group aims to legalize recreational marijuana for people over 21 years old. 

HomeSlice Media Group donated $16,300 worth of creative services and travel expenses to the committee. The committee’s chairman, Brad Jurgenson, is president of HomeSlice Media. Major cash donors included Puffy’s marijuana dispensary in Rapid City and the Flower Shop of Dell Rapids. Both gave $10,000. Grow South Dakota spent about $800.

South Dakotans for Better Marijuana Laws Inc. also works to legalize marijuana. It raised no money and spent no money, but received $5,000 worth of staff time and website operations from the Marijuana Policy Project in Washington, D.C. 

On the other side of the issue, Protecting South Dakota Kids (the group that opposed legalizing marijuana in 2022) took in about $4,400 and spent $176.

This South Dakota Searchlight article is republished online under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0.

Photo: Joe Kirby, head of South Dakota Open Primaries, signs a petition on April 19, 2023, in Sioux Falls that aims to allow all voters to cast a vote in the state’s primary elections. Kirby is seated next to De Knudson of Sioux Falls, with Tom Dempster of Sioux Falls standing to her left. (John Hult/South Dakota Searchlight)

Related posts

• Keeping up with the gophers? Draft language released for potential South Dakota adult cannabis use ballot measure 
•  Would ballot effort to establish “jungle primaries” break SD Republican strangehold?
•  Dakotans for Health withdraws IM2, joins South Dakotans Decide Healthcare, Amendment D 
• SD Supreme Court strikes down legal cannabis; supporters vow to make the people rule 
• While will of the people stifled in South Dakota, MN absentmindedly legalized THC edibles

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.

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

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