As global temperatures warm, Minnesota residents need to prepare for increases in catastrophic "mega-rains" and a greater spread of tick-borne illnesses such as Lyme disease, according to a draft environmental report card for the state.
The report card comes from the Environmental Quality Board, a coordinating body for state government agencies on environmental issues. The board will discuss the draft Dec. 21. The final version will provide a foundation for the Minnesota Environmental Congress in February.
The report card is organized around five key areas: water, land, air, energy and climate. Each section uses three metrics to assess how well Minnesota's environment is doing in those areas. It rates their current status as green, yellow and red to correspond with good, OK and poor. And it uses up arrows, flat arrows or down arrows to indicate recent trends.
"We're hoping it's pretty user-friendly. It's designed for a broad audience," Will Seuffert, the EQB's executive director, said Monday.
Bluestem has downloaded the EQB agenda packet for December 21, 2016, since we agree wth Seuffert's assessment about this document being designed for a broader audience and split out the document for our readers.
If you appreciate our posts and original analysis, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 33166 770th Ave, Ortonville, MN 56278) 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 sally.jo.sorensen at gmail.com as recipient.
Over the past few years, Bluestem has reported that the Coalition for a Secure Energy Future is a marketing campaign authorized and paid by the North Dakota Industrial Commission, a state government agency.
Fine said that the purpose of the project is to improve the overall public image of coal-based electricity, build a support base on behalf of coal-based electricity in order to prevent or mitigate public policies adverse to the use of coal and to promote coal use as a low-cost, efficient and environmentally compatible energy source for the region. Through the Coalition for a Secure Energy Future provide multiple avenues for a diverse group of supporters to continue supporting coal-based electricity and political candidates [emphasis added] who support coal-based electricity.
Tactics which will be used include: paid media; earned media; website; media relations; grassroots communications; conducting studies and public opinion pools, hosting face-to-face meetings and working with other supporters to provide for a large, unified voice.
Of course, that's so not lobbying or supporting political candidates because the Coalition for A Secure Energy Future isn't registered an association hiring lobbyists or a registered political committee.
A number of readers forwarded us this email about an "educational" dog-and-pony show that will be presented to legislators and candidates. members of electrical co-ops across the state[Correction,October 11, 2016: copy stricken as this is incorrect; see Frank Jossi's In Minnesota, coal still has its defenders — funded by North Dakota.]
Somehow, despite this bunch's touting of an "all-of-the-above" approach to energy production, we somehow doubt this bunch will be promoting clean, renewable sources of energy and energy conservation itself.
Here's bulk of the email:
The Coalition for a Secure Energy Future, a project of the Lignite Energy Council, is hosting a series of educational sessions on Minnesota energy starting in September and October.
The Coalition promotes an all of the above energy strategy and is dedicated to enhancing, preserving, and protecting our diverse set of energy resources, including coal-based electricity, to ensure a continued affordable and reliable energy supply for families and businesses in Minnesota.
Each Energy 101 session will be conducted by Joel Johnson and Co-Chairs Loren Solberg and Mike Beard. Sessions will last usually 45 minutes.
• September 19- Minnesota Valley Electric Co-Op – Jordan - 10:00 AM 125 Minnesota Valley Electric Dr, Jordan, MN 55352
• September 22 - Meeker Cooperative Association - Litchfield –11:00 AM 1725 US-12, Litchfield, MN 55355
• September 23 – Kandiyohi Power Co-Op – Spicer – 11:00 AM 8605 47th St NE Spicer, MN 56288
• September 28 - Steel/Waseca Electric Cooperative - Owatonna – 10:00 AM 2411 W Bridge St, Owatonna, MN 55060
• September 29– East Central Energy – Braham – 11:00 AM 412 Main Ave N, Braham, MN 55006
• October 3 – Lake Region Electric Cooperative – Pelican Rapids – 1:00 PM 1401 S Broadway, Pelican Rapids, MN 56572
• October 10 – Lyon-Lincoln Electric Cooperative – Tyler – 1:00 PM 205 US-14, Tyler, MN 56178
• October 11 – BENCO Electric Cooperative – Mankato 11:00 AM 20946 549th Ave, Mankato, MN 56001
• October 13 - Beltrami Electric Cooperative - Bemidji – 1:00 PM 4111 Technology DR NW, Bemidji, MN 56601
We will cover topics such as how Minnesota produces and imports electricity, how electricity is transmitted, what impact regulations have on jobs and cost, and how Minnesota can continue to have affordable and reliable energy.
As you know, energy and electricity are very complex topics, so it’s vital to be able to talk about how electricity makes it from one of the many energy generating facilities to a home or business. . . .
Bluestem sure hopes that some of our readers will attend Energy 101--perhaps recording video or audio--and report back. Perhaps the Coalition for a Secure Energy Future might even consider livestreaming these sessions, since the public relation campaign's backers certainly have dug up enough of North Dakota's tax dollars to pay for such complete transparency.
For more information, check out our earlier coverage of the Coalition for a Secure Energy Future:
If you appreciate our posts and original analysis, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 33166 770th Ave, Ortonville, MN 56278) 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 sally.jo.sorensen at gmail.com as recipient.
On Thursday night, the Winona County Planning Commission heard public testimony on the county's proposed ordinance to ban the mining of frac sand (silica sand). News reports and social media shared during the event reveal overwhelming support for the ban.
About 200 people packed the rotunda of the Tau Center on the West Campus at Winona State University to answer Margaret Lambert's question: "To ban, or not to ban?"
Lambert, a Winona resident, was one 74 people to address the Winona County Planning Commission as it opened its public hearing Thursday on a proposed ban on silica sand mining for the industrial purpose of hydraulic fracturing. Of the 74 individuals who spoke during the public comment portion of the meeting, 15 opposed the ban and 59 supported the ban.
As for Lambert, she answered her own question by asking the commission where the funds for a mining expert to write regulations would come from and how much it would cost, and where the funds for enforcement of any regulations would come from and how much it might cost. "Who will pay for damage to the environment?" she asked. . . .
Reasons to support the ban ran a broad spectrum. From the costs of enforcing regulations to the damage caused, both financial and ecological. Some brought up the trustworthiness of the mining industry. . . .
The debate over whether to ban frac sand in Winona County took center stage Thursday in the city.
The Tau Center on Winona State University’s west campus — a venue selected specifically because of the interest in the issue, with the meeting moved from the small county government center — was filled Thursday night for the county planning commission’s first step in discussing the county’s proposed frac sand ban.
The public hearing was strictly to receive public comment, with any final decision left to the county board in late summer or early fall, but the groundswell of support for a ban was immediately evident Thursday. . . .
Dozens of people spoke in the meeting. The speakers for the ban outnumbered those against it by wide margins, but both were represented as the discussion moves forward toward a potential fall vote by the county board.
Those against the ban mostly spoke about the use of regulation, and about not using picking and choosing between uses of the fine, round sand that’s been favored for fracking operations in Texas and elsewhere in the country. . . .
Check out the rest at the WDN. Social media buzzed with the twitter hashtag #fracsandban(and without). Some representative tweets:
We'll have more on this story as it develops. Bluestem Prairie has been following Minnesota's frac sand mining debate since 2011.
Photo: The crowd at the hearing at the Tau Center. Photo by Bobby king, via twitter.
Bluestem Prairie is conducting its summer fundraising drive. If you appreciate our posts and original analysis, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen P.O. Box 108, Maynard MN 56260) 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 sally.jo.sorensen at gmail.com as recipient.
In 2013, the Houston County Board voted that anyone who serves three consecutive 3-year term on the planning and zoning board must sit out for one term at the end of that service.
In short: term limits.
Now the move by three Houston County board members to ignore those limits in re-appointing a board member to his fourth consecutive term is receiving sharp criticism in the largely rural county in Minnesota's southeastern corner.
Many critics believe the action illustrates a pro-frac sand mining bias on a county board that flouts its own rules.
For too long, (three of) our county commissioners have operated to serve what appears to be “the good ‘ol boy” network of friends, family and special interests.
They have used their positions seemingly to govern for the few and not for the best interest of their constituents, the many.
As 92 percent of you came before them regarding your opposition to the Frac Sand mining, they listened to the outcry, but then did an about face and came down on the side of their own interest, and refused to ban frac sand mining in the county.
They continue to do all they can to protect this decision, this time by circumventing their own rule and allowing Glenn Kruse to remain on the planning commission even though in 2013 they voted that anyone who serves three consecutive 3-year terms, as Kruse has; must get off of the planning and zoning board for one term.
That rule was put in to place, of course, given the possibility that it might be a struggle to find someone to serve.
Commissioners Judy Storlie, Steve Schuldt and Teresa Walter, however, used the loop hole to ensure that the planning and zoning board not have to be represented by a diverse board of voices.
Seven individuals brought their names forward to serve on the P&Z board. There was no struggle to find someone to serve. Several highly qualified individuals were among the pool of applicants. Not all, however, agree with the latest recommendations being made to the county board by the planning commission. Therefore, not all agreed with the position of commissioners Walter, Schuldt and Storlie.
Unbeknownst to Dana Kjome who is the county board’s representative on the P&Z board, interviews were held by Storlie, Schuldt and county attorney Sam Jandt.
The commissioners then voted to reappoint a member who had served three consecutive three year terms and by their own 2013 motion should have had to remain off the P&Z board for one term.
For too often the three commissioners have taken the view point that they only want to listen to one side of an issue and not allow the other side to be heard.
They have scaled the public comment portion of their regular meetings to once per month because a frustrated constituency had come to them week after week after week after week hoping that the commissioners might actually hear them and at the very least acknowledge their concerns.
Instead the public comment period is now one meeting per month. What had been eight whole minutes (said facetiously) to have their voices heard was changed to three minutes once-per month so that the commissioners don’t need to be bothered with the trivial concerns of the voters they are supposed to represent.
And now the planning and zoning board were afforded the same luxuries.
The rules were bent so that the board members would not have to be bothered with a varied opinion.
The same narrative will continue to come from the planning and zoning board. Diverse and varied opinions will not be heard and therefore the commissioners can continue to pass, by a 3-2 margin, the planning and zoning rules that are brought forward by the board month after month.
They can continue to only have to “listen” (again I’m being facetious) to an opinion that differs from theirs just once per month, for three minutes each speaker.
When our democracy works, it works best when two sides of an issue come together to find common ground and all voices are heard and considered.
These commissioners continue to use the seats upon which they sit to forward their own narratives and agendas.
When a constituent, and coincidently someone who threw his name into the ring to be considered for the planning commission seat, asked Steve Schuldt “what do you want us to do just bend over and “take it?”
His reply was: “I guess you’ll just have to take it.”
That’s a fairly unprofessional response from a commissioner whose role should be to represent the best interests of the entire county.
It is my job to report on our leaders activities and decisions as accurately and balanced as possible. That in turn allows county residents to determine if the decisions they are making and the actions they approve are in those citizens’ best interests.
If they are not, then the constituents can decide if our current leaders should be removed so someone who will govern for the people, of the people and by the people can be put in their place.
Week after week, decision after decision it is apparent that the three commissioners are only governing for the few and not for the best interest of the citizens of this county.
We should all do everything within our power to see that this trend is stopped in November, 2016.
I guess, if voters agree, commissioner Schuldt and Storlie– you’ll just have to take it
That's fairly strong stuff. Readers and citizens are echoing the sentiments in the letters section with commentary sporting headlines like No matter how bad you think it is, it is worse:
. . .Just two years ago the County Board voted unanimously to have term limits for the Planning Commission. Three terms of three years each was to be the limit and then a person would have to sit out an entire term before being able to serve again. At the Dec. 22nd meeting these three commissioners voted to reinstall Glenn Kruse for a 6th term.
Why did this happen when there were five other highly qualified candidates to choose from, one of them an attorney. There are two reasons. 1. Glenn Kruse is in favor of frac sand mining. 2. Glenn Kruse has a long history of enabling and covering up the lack of enforcement of the Ordinances in this County. . .
suspended for five days last year (two days were dropped if he completed some actions) because a long investigation found he had retaliated against frac-sand opponents by trying to use zoning rules against them, shared confidential information with others and gave special treatment by advocating in behalf of others.
Photo: In a pit and digging deeper; or a mine in Wisconsin.
If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen P.O. Box 108, Maynard MN 56260) or use the paypal button below:
It's an older story from December 16--and the details are behind a firewall--but the Tower Timberjay reported in Future cloudy for solar panel maker:
A solar panel manufacturer, that has claimed millions of dollars in public subsidies since opening in 2011, has laid off all but two workers and faces an uncertain future . . .
This is more bad news for the Range, where about 2000 iron miners have been laid off because of the downturn in the American steel industry. It's also likely to spur anger among other solar panel firms that did not enjoy the subsidies that were directed toward Silicon Energy.
We'll have more in this post as we learn more.
Photo: Solar panels.
If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen P.O. Box 108, Maynard MN 56260) or use the paypal button below:
While Minnesota opponents of the EPA's Clean Power Plan moan about potential increases in the price of energy (while never uttering the phrase "climate change"), some of them were not the least reluctant to support legislation that will raise electrical rates for residential consumers in favor of energy-intensive industries.
Residential customers of Minnesota Power would pay more for electricity each month to help taconite plants and paper mills survive an onslaught of global competition under a plan to be filed today with the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission.
The rate re-jiggering, authorized by the 2015 Minnesota Legislature, would see the average Minnesota Power customer's household electric bill go up 14.5 percent, or about $11.45 per month.
An average homeowner, who uses about 750 kilowatts of electricity, would see their monthly Minnesota Power bill go from about $79 per month to $90.45.
Other customers — most businesses, government agencies, schools, etc. — would see their rates go up by a flat fee of $11.45 per meter, per month, an increase of between 1 and 4 percent. . . .
It's not a done deal, and even the sponsor of the legislation is having second thoughts:
Investor-owned Minnesota Power has a clear stake in the future of mining in the region. Mining companies alone account for more than 47 percent of Minnesota Power's revenue. Add in paper mills, and heavy industry accounts for nearly 60 percent of the utility's customer load, far different from most utilities, such as Minneapolis-based Xcel, which are tilted toward residential customers.
That makes it critical for Minnesota Power's financial health to retain its largest customers. If one or more of those large customers close permanently, Minnesota Power probably would file a rate proposal that would cause homeowner rates to go up much higher, Mullen noted.
But state Rep. Tom Anzelc, DFL-Balsam Township, who sponsored the legislation calling for the rate shift, said he's now having second thoughts. Anzelc said he's not sure the time is right for such a major shift in pricing for electricity.
"What they (Minnesota Power) are proposing to the PUC is not what they are going to get. It's too much" for homeowners, Anzelc said.
During the spring legislative session "it seemed like the right policy. But the timing now is not good," Anzelc said. "I have to see what people think. The PUC is going to have to decide if $11.45 is too much for people on fixed incomes; whether it's worth it for a 5 percent cut for taconite plants. I'm not sure right now."
Buddy Robinson, director of the Minnesota Citizens Federation, Northeast, said the formula used to make the claim that industry has been subsidizing homeowner rates is flawed.
"This isn't the first time the taconite industry has tried to do this and we've challenged it every time," Robinson said. "There are ways to figure the true cost (of electricity) that show there is in fact no subsidy going on." . . .
Here's the Minnesota Power press release. Note that qualified low-income customers won't have their rates increased. We have to wonder why--if those who claim to worry about the cost of the Clean Power Plan to the poor--aren't willing to give them a break on the rates to soften the blow to help save the planet.
Or does that only work when helping out industries that can't compete against cut-throat global capitalism?
We're conducting our November fundraising drive. If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie's original reporting and analysis, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen P.O. Box 108, Maynard MN 56260) or use the paypal button below:
New York's attorney general has joined a coalition of 24 states, cities and counties seeking to intervene in court to help defend a federal plan to require power plants cut their greenhouse gas emissions.
The group is filing a motion to intervene at the U.S. Court of Appeals defending the Environmental Protection Agency's plan that has been challenged by several states and power industry groups.
Attorney General Eric Schneiderman says the plan is needed to respond to the threat of climate change and incorporates strategies New York and several other states have used to cut pollution.
The coalition includes attorneys general from California, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia and Washington. [end update]
In Tuesday's Caledonia Argus, we find a press release from state House Majority Whip Roseau Republican Dan Fabian's office reprinted on the southeastern Minnesota newspaper's op-ed page.
On Thursday, October 29, 2015, Representative Dan Fabian (R-Roseau) sent a letter to Minnesota Attorney General Lori Swanson asking her to add Minnesota to a coalition of 25 states who have filed suit in the last week against the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) over President Obama’s Clean Power Plan.
A previous letter was sent to the Attorney General’s office in late September, signed by Rep. Fabian and 43 other state representatives, which requested Attorney General Swanson take action against this overreaching federal rule. Her office responded that this could not be done until the rule was published in the Federal Register, which it was on October 23, 2015.
“This expensive and burdensome new rule, which the EPA has conceded will have no measurable environmental benefit, greatly expands federal authority over state energy policy and will impact the availability of affordable energy for folks across the state,” said Rep. Fabian. “Twenty-five states have already filed suit which demonstrates just how overreaching and devastating President Obama’s Clean Power Plan is. This is a bipartisan issue that has people across the nation concerned, and that’s why now is the time for Minnesota to lead and stand up for the people of our state.”
The letter follows, with the usual crocodile tears for the poor:
Dear Attorney General Swanson,
On September 29, 2015, your office responded to a letter sent by myself and forty-three other state representatives asking the Attorney General to add Minnesota to the growing coalition of states challenging the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in a federal court regarding President Obama’s Clean Power Plan, issued under the agency’s 111(d) rulemaking authority. You indicated that your office would consult with the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) regarding the rule, as well as wait for it to be published by the Federal Register.
This overreaching new rule is now in effect, having been published in the Federal Register on October 23, 2015. Furthermore, you have had ample time to consult with the MPCA in regards to the effects these new federal guidelines will have on our state. That is why I would like to once again ask you to challenge this rule in a federal court on behalf of the state of Minnesota.
As I stated before, not only will this significantly expanded scope of federal power under EPA rulemaking undermine state regulatory authority, but it will also impact the availability of affordable energy for families, businesses and communities statewide. Additionally, there is a possibility that its implementation could lead to the closure of coal-fired power plants in our state, creating significant job loss and increased energy costs. These price increases will most greatly affect those who can least afford it including people with low or fixed incomes, the elderly, local schools and nursing homes.
Furthermore, the EPA conceded there will be no measurable environmental benefit which calls to question the validity of implementing these expensive, overreaching new federal requirements when there is little expected positive environmental results.
Twenty-five states have already filed suit against the Clean Power Plan in the last week, and by joining as a plaintiff, Minnesota will be a strong voice for state regulatory authority, protect Minnesota jobs and energy reliability, and hopefully help stop the alarming expansion of federal power over state energy policy.
I appreciate your attention to this matter and look forward to your response.
We've added the bold emphasis to the text about closing coal plants, since that's the special interest that leading the Republican lamentation on the Clean Energy Plan (and Xcel's response or the MPCA's stakeholders' discussions).
Climate change: the threat that dare not speak its name
The Roseau Republican can't even bring himself to use the phrases "climate change" or "global warming." Not surprising for a guy whose caucus said, 'What climate change?', as Star Tribune columnist Jon Tevlin wrote:
On the front page of Tuesday’s newspaper, a headline read: “As summers get hotter, humans get more blame.” This idea is being accepted as fact by most scientists around the world, by businesses and by government agencies such as NASA and the Department of Defense.
Even the pope seems to be down with it.
But apparently climate change is still not accepted in the Minnesota House.
The issue came up during the omnibus job growth and energy affordability finance bill discussion on the House floor last week. It was one of those debates that make you slap your forehead — and wonder how some of our elected representatives even found their way in to work that day. . . .
For your morning face palm, read the moments from the debate caught Tevlin's attention.
They don't believe in it, and they're not going to mention its name, if Fabian's prose is an example of the spin.
Silence is golden, or a least a strategy against public opinion
An article published yesterday by US News and World's energy, environment and STEM reporter Alan Neuhauser may underscore Fabian's need to obscure--as in not mention whatsoever--the issue.
When it comes to the Clean Power Plan, most voters don't want their day in court.
Across the 26 states suing to stop the landmark rule – the first ever to limit carbon emissions from existing power plants – an average 61 percent of adults say they support the policy, according to an analysis released Monday by the Yale Project on Climate Change Communication.
In only three of those states do most voters oppose the Clean Power Plan: West Virginia and Wyoming, the nation's top two coal producers, as well as North Dakota, which has seen a boom in unconventional oil and natural gas production, commonly referred to as "fracking.". . .
On October 23rd, President Obama’s signature climate change program The Clean Power Plan was entered into the Federal Register. Almost immediately, 26 US states sued to stop the policy, which sets strict limits on coal-fired power plants. However, according to our model of state-level public opinion (Yale Climate Opinion Maps, 2014), a majority of the public in 23 out of the 26 states filing suits actually support setting strict limits on coal-fired power plants. Across all 26 suing states, 61% of the public supports the policy, ranging from 73% public support in New Jersey to 43% in Wyoming and West Virginia. Across all 26 suing states, only 38% of the public on average opposes the policy. . . .
America’s history of controversy over climate change and the legal and political challenges to the Clean Power Plan might suggest that the nation is divided over regulating carbon dioxide from coal-fired power plants. Our research finds the opposite: a large majority of Americans overall support the approach. Our models find that a majority of Americans in almost every state support setting strict emission limits on coal-fired power plants. . . .
The analysis was released after Fabian sent his missive to Attorney General Swanson, but we can be forgiven in thinking that the Majority Caucus communications and political staff likely has access to its own focus group data that helps in framing this as so not being about climate change but helping those poor folks and middle class Minnesotans to whom the Republican Party is dedicated 24/7/365.
When people know the issue is taking on climate change, they support tighter standards on power plants. Solution? Don't talk about climate change.
If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen P.O. Box 108, Maynard MN 56260) or use the paypal button below:
If all a person had to go on with regard to concern for the environment and climate action were Minnesota House Speaker Kurt Daudt's declaration that the "real" divide in Minnesota is between metro environmentalists and the rest of the state--and Becker Republican state representative Jim Newberger's bleating about coal-fired power plants, we'd think that only dirty hippies in Powderhorn Park care about the planet.
But since we live in rural Minnesota, we know better. Thus, it's not a surprise to find a letter like that of Chuck Derry, of Clearwater, Minnesota, in the Sherburne County Citizen.
I read the article in last week’s edition of the Citizen regarding the recent announcement by Xcel to retire Sherco 1 & 2. It is disappointing to see, that even after Xcel has put forth their preferred plan for the plant, our local representative is still trying to scare people with how devastating this will be.
Xcel’s plan will retire the two oldest and dirtiest units at Sherco by 2023 and 2026, a timeline that is aggressive but reasonable considering the long term decisions that will need to be made in coming years when it comes to providing baseload power. Sherco is the top polluter of particulate matter that exacerbates asthma, other respiratory illnesses and heart disease. According to the Clean Air Task Force, Sherco contributes to 92 deaths, 1,600 asthma attacks, and 150 heart attacks each year. Sherco is also the single, largest source of carbon pollution that contributes to changes in Minnesota’s four seasons, our climate, and our health. According to the Minnesota Department of Health, changes to our climate are increasing heat-related illnesses, allergies, and the spread of tick-borne illnesses, like Lyme’s Disease. If that isn’t enough, Sherco is one of the most significant sources of mercury pollution in our state, contaminating our water ways, and resulting in health advisories against eating fresh caught fish.
Xcel’s plan will reduce carbon emissions by 60% and help protect jobs during that time, helping to ease retirement transition for those that are eligible and will allow for those that aren't at retirement age to maintain their positions either at the plant itself or within Xcel. The plan also includes 50MW of solar on site at the plant, which will help add money into the tax base of Becker that Xcel was supporting, diversifying the taxable income is a smart idea. Putting all of our eggs in one basket is not.
We also know that the plan includes 3,500 MW of clean energy like solar and wind (1,200 MW by 2020) which will help to create thousands of new jobs in central MN. And finally Xcel has said that the assets at the plant (boilers, including Sherco 1 & 2) were beginning to depreciate, meaning their value was lessening, which meant Xcel would be paying less in taxes as their local assets got older. This is planning for the future, something that we should have started doing long ago.
I encourage readers to let local leaders know they should stop playing politics with people’s lives and get on board with Xcel’s plan. Xcel should be applauded for the thought it put into its plan to maintain jobs, increase the tax base, at the same time it invests in clean energy. Our lives and the lives of our children depend on this. This is a win-win.
Who knew?
Photo: Sherco.
If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen P.O. Box 108, Maynard MN 56260) or use the paypal button below:
Not surprisingly for folks with both background and backers in the fossil fuel industry, both father and son are climate change deniers.
In Lake Elmo last Monday, Rafael Cruz derided climate change after touting his son's qualifications as a "servant" to the people.
From the Machine Shed: the Lake Elmo talk
At the Woodbury Bulletin, Mathias Basen reports in Ted Cruz for President campaign visits Woodbury area that the presidential candidate's father was in town as the guest of the local Republican BPOU (basic party operating units):
Rafael Cruz passed through Minnesota at the invitation of the Senate District 56 Republicans and their counterparts from Senate District 39. The local GOP party extended requests to all of the Presidential candidates’ campaigns, but Senate District 53 Republicans chairman Brandon Lerch admitted that while the Ted Cruz for President campaign was not the only one to respond to the invitation, it might be the only one that sends such a powerful spokesperson. Still Lerch and Senate District 53 Republicans chairman Nick Norman are hoping for Rafael Cruz’s speech to be the first of a series.
Unlike the lunch at the Minneapolis Club, the evening appearance was captured for a wider audience. North Star Oasis, which bills itself on its Facebook page as "a weekly live television program that airs from 4-5 p.m. Central Time every Saturday in the St. Paul, Minnesota suburban area," posted a Youtube of the entire talk here.
Conservative talk radio host Bob Davis podcast about the event in Episode 424, estimating the audience to be about 90 people.
After outlining his son's fundraising prowess among small donors and nationwide campaign structure, Pastor Cruz touts Wallbuilders' founder David Barton's assumption of the reins at the Keep The Promise group of SuperPACs:
He claims that Barton's personal integrity will set these independent groups--which are not supposed to coordinate with the campaign--apart:
Now let me tell you another huge news. David Barton now has taken over the SuperPAC [cheers from audience]. David Barton is a man of unquestionable integrity, a man that America highly, highly respects. I'll tell you what that does. It puts the SuperPAC in a totally different credibility.
Rafael Cruz said he had just learned that David Barton, an influential evangelical leader and political activist, would be leading one of the Ted Cruz super-Pacs. . . .
It's unfortunate that Brucato is too lazy to consult Mr. Google, for she would have discovered (had she had the slightest bit of curiosity about anything) that Barton's leadership wasn't a shiny thing. This non-breaking news was first reported over a month ago in obscure venues like Bloomberg News.
David Barton, an influential Christian author and activist, is taking charge of the leading super-PAC supporting Ted Cruz.
The super-PAC, Keep the Promise PAC, is the umbrella for a group of related pro-Cruz political committees that raised $38 million in the first half of the year, more than the super-PACs supporting any other candidate with the exception of Jeb Bush.
"From the outset, the Keep the Promise PACs made their mission to provide a voice for the millions of courageous conservatives who are looking to change the direction of the country," Keep the Promise PAC said in a statement today. "Barton's involvement is an important step signaling that the effort will not be run by a D.C. consultant but by a grassroots activist."
. . .Barton is a self-taught historian, former school administrator and the founder of Wallbuilders, a group dedicated to the idea that the U.S. was established as a Christian nation and should embrace those roots. Time Magazine named him one of the country's top 25 most influential evangelicals in 2005.
His 2012 book about Thomas Jefferson, The Jefferson Lies, was withdrawn by its publisher after being denounced by some mainstream academics as full of errors. Barton has dismissed such criticisms as politically motivated and has remained influential on the religious right. . ..
Why does David Barton have such a poor reputation in the academic community? It’s not because of his religious convictions, his politics, or even his shortage of formal training. It’s his poor track record as a self-described historian. Numerous scholars, reporters and other writers have taken Barton to task for manipulating historical fact to promote his agenda.
The following is a clearinghouse of resources on Barton's poor scholarship. ...
He believes that demons control the government and is also a Second Amendment radical who insists that there should literally be no limits on what sort of weapons individuals can own, including tanks, jet fighters, or nuclear weapons.
But most of all, Barton is vehemently anti-gay, claiming that schools are forcing students to be gay and that the government should regulate gay sex. Recently, he has been telling audiences that the Supreme Court decision legalizing gay marriage will force all student athletes to share the same locker rooms and churches to hire pedophiles to run their nurseries while requiring the military to protect those who engage in bestiality.
Well okay then. We think that selecting Barton to run his SuperPAC might well put Senator Cruz in the driver's seat of the Clown Car, or at least allow him to call shotgun to Carson or Trump, who seem to tied for first this week.
The Bartons visit Minnesota
Between the September 9 news of David Barton's new job and Pastor Cruz' talk at the Machine Shed just over a month later, David Barton visited Minnesota while his son taught for a week at a local private Christian school in Andover.
The Minnesota Family Council shared the image above on its website, along with this message:
Christian parents understand that God has placed the responsibility of raising godly children, and guarding children's hearts and minds, solely with their parents. We deeply appreciate Christian schools like Legacy that understand parents' irreplaceble role and partner with them to raise up our next generation of godly leaders.
Legacy's outstanding guest, Historian David Barton, is renowned for his work and understanding of our Christian heritage
The largely political organization added that it was not a sponsor of the event. On its Facebook page, the Legacy Christian Academy shared several photos from the evening. Earlier in the day, it shared one with this caption:
Spiritual Emphasis Week is underway! We are blessed to have David Barton and Tim Barton at LCA to speak to our community!
It is undeniable truth the Founding Fathers of our great United States, the Declaration of Independence, the Revolutionary War, the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights ALL had as their foundation the religious and moral conviction of the Bible. Much of present day societal ills from abortion to mass shootings, from drug abuse to human trafficking, from fatherless children to sexual redefinition (just to name a few) are the natural byproduct of turning away from truth.
Here's the photo:
David Barton had already added SuperPACmeister to his list of theocracy building by this time. Did he court any big contributors--like the members of the Freedom Club--when he was in town?
We imagine that the son's weeklong residency had probably been scheduled before the father took over management of the political action committees. Perhaps there was nothing political going on, however much the Bartons' presence attracted conservative lawmakers, like fruit flies to ripe muskmelons.
Keeping a promise I: who stuffed the bills in Ted Cruz' SuperPACs?
Barton steps into a stable of SuperPACs stoked by contributions mostly from people who've made their nut in the fossil fuel industry.
Four affiliated super PACs supporting the presidential bid of Ted Cruz reported a fundraising haul of $37.8 million — a significant haul that puts the conservative Texas senator in the top fundraising tier.
The bulk of the money comes from seven individual donors. Keep the Promise I, which took in about $11 million, is funded almost entirely by Robert Mercer, the New York hedge fund magnate. Keep the Promise II is fueled by a single $10 million donation from Toby Neugebauer, a Puerto Rico-based investor who is the son of Texas GOP Rep. Randy Neugebauer. Keep the Promise III, which brought in $15 million, is sustained only by the Texas-based Wilks brothers, Farris and Dan, billionaires who made their fortunes in fracking, and their wives, JoAnn and Staci.
A fourth pro-Cruz super PAC, called Keep the Promise PAC, took in $1.8 million, nearly all from Texas-based donors, including Robert McNair, Sr., the chairman and CEO of the Houston Texans football franchise.
Mr. Neugebauer, the son of Representative Randy Neugebauer, Republican of Texas, is the co-founder of Quantum Energy Partners and has been an active investor in the oil and gas sectors, overseeing billions of dollars of assets.
Keeping a promise II: Pastor Cruz trashes climate change
There's nothing inherently anti-evangelical or anti-Christian in the notion of climate change. Witness the Evangelical Environmental Network or Pope Francis's recent encyclical on climate change. One might be tempted to think that the Cruzes are listening to the gospel of climate change denial and their funders on this one.
Pastor Cruz is asked about climate change, something that the audience member believes is a hoax designed to control people:
Audience Member: I believe the issue of climate change was created for government control--
Pastor Cruz: Absolutely!
Audience Member: And I think it's a religion of secular Democrats.
Pastor Cruz: As a matter of fact--did you see the question that my son had with the Sierra Club just this last week in the committee? I'll tell you what, he had the president of the Sierra Club in the committee in the Senate and Ted asked him, he said, now let me ask you a question, how do you justify when you keep pushing this global warming when the data proves that over the last 18 years there's been zero global warming?
And this guy repeats--as a matter of fact he first talks to a guy that's standing behind him and then he states, well, 97 percent of a consensus of scientists is that global warming is a reality and we need to abide by that.
And then again, Ted asked the same question, he asked it about six times and this guy parroted the same answer and Ted even said, look, that statement was based on a study that has been proven to be a bogus study based on falsified data.
This week, you held a hearing on the clean air and clean water safeguards that protect millions of American families. I testified because I wanted to talk about how these safeguards are especially critical for people of color and low-income communities, who are disproportionately affected by pollution and climate disruption .
But we digress. Pastor Cruz continues in the excerpt above:
Global warming is a manufactured thing. You want to take it to the extreme, it wasn't too long ago, they even said, well, cow farting is causing global warming. Even the cows are to blame. As a matter of fact, the whole thing is based on bogus data. It is all about control. It has nothing to do with global warming.
I'll tell you where global warming has worked. It's worked for Al Gore. Al Gore has become nearly a billionaire pushing this garbage of global warming, but there's no reality to it.
In case readers forgot, in April, we learned that most of the Republicans in the Minnesota House agreed. A press release from Rep Melissa Hortman, Is Climate Change Real? 99% of House Republicans Vote No, spelled out the sad story.
Pastor Cruz goes on to attack not only the Environmental Protection Agency, but workplace safety (OSHA) and unemployment compensation. It's quite the rant about the loss of the enterprising American spirit.
Pastor Cruz is dancing with the old school, fossil fuel capitalists filling the SuperPACs' coffers.
What's this strategy all about?
Pastor Cruz bashes marriage equality as well as workplace safety and climate change; in his podcast, Bob Davis calls it "red meat" for the base, but we have to wonder why attacking policy attractive to so many voters is a path to victory.
he $38 million super PAC supporting Ted Cruz plans to highlight polarizing issues as part of a full-throttle plan to turn out the white evangelical voters that can power him to victory, a new document reveals.
Keep the Promise, whose strategy is detailed in a 51-slide PowerPoint presentation titled "Can He Win?" recently posted to the organization's website, mercilessly attacks 2012 presidential candidate Mitt Romney as unable to elevate "wedge issues," or divisive issues that polarize voters, to the forefront of the Republican debate. Calling Romney a "terrible candidate with a terrible campaign," the slides pillory him as a Republican who managed to squander winnable states just like every other "loser" moderate candidate.
By deploying these issues and emphasizing his Hispanic heritage and religious roots, Cruz can win the presidency, the super PAC says.
The presentation, seemingly written to appeal to donors, syncs with much of the pitch that Cruz himself makes on the stump: that Republicans have their best chance of winning the White House if they nominate a clear-eyed conservative who can turn out the GOP base. But the presentation makes the fullest case yet for how Cruz's allies believe he has a path both to win the Republican nomination and then to defeat Hillary Clinton, who is mentioned by name in the presentation.
Among the wedge issues from past campaigns that the document cites in the Fear of A Black Planet Willie Horton ads. Fearing black lives and criminal justice reform, climate change and cute boys marrying each other, the Cruz campaign--which frets over control--seeks to further divide the country in order to gain control of the White House.
Oh good.
Here's the document, which we found online, although the CNN link is no longer working:
If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen P.O. Box 108, Maynard MN 56260) or use the paypal button below:
In Friday's Morning Take, we read about promotional activities for tomorrow's Governor's Pheasant Opener near Mankato. Lt. Governor Tina Smith
At 4:00pm, the Lt. Governor and the Nicollet Conservation Club will take a guided boat tour of Swan Lake, the largest prairie pothole marsh in the contiguous United States.
It's good to see the lake valued and we hope Smith enjoys the tour.
Back in the early 1970s, the shallow prairie lake was a candidate for becoming the cooling pond for a coal-fired power plant. In 2013, the New Ulm Journal reported in Swan Lake meeting draws a crowd:
A roomful of outdoors enthusiasts energetically told of their past and present experiences on Swan Lake at the Nicollet Conservation Club on Tuesday.
Hosted by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) and Nicollet County Historical Society (NHS), the event about one of the largest prairie pothole lakes in the lower 48 states included a wide array of information and story telling by DNR and NHS officials as well as area sports enthusiasts.
Once twice the size it is now, Swan Lake was Minnesota's largest marsh-wetland ecosystem before it was drained for more farmland decades ago. . . .
Swan Lake's water level is more stable than many other area lakes and sloughs. It's well vegetated," said Stein Innvaer of the Nicollet DNR office. "Northern States Power (NSP) was going to build a coal-fired power plant on the lake once.
[David Vesall, assistant game and fish director] and other officials of the DNR met with the Governor's Task Force on Power Plant Siting to explain the department's position on designation of the Lake. Swan Lake is one of seven sites proposed for development by Northern States Power Co. of a 1,600-megawatt fossil burning power plant.
It's possible, then, that Nicollet County could have going through the turmoil facing Sherburne County, rather than the tour today, had the fool-hardy choice to turn a duck-factory into an industrial site gone forward.
Yesterday, Bluestem Prairie watched the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency's Clean Power Plan Stakeholder meeting online, listening to representatives from utilities, environmental organizations and state legislators discuss the plan to reduce carbon emissions--and possibly slow climate change.
One legislator tweeted:
At Clean Power Plan mtg I am reminded/remember: Team work makes the Dream Work! Mn leadership works = problem solving.
What will happen in Becker as the two coal-fired units are phased out? Two Republican lawmakers fretted about that, but others, including an owner of a construction company, pointed out that clean energy also creates jobs.
. . . In 2023, Sherco Unit 2 will be shut down. In 2026, Sherco Unit 1 will be shut down and subsequently, Sherco Unit 2 will be converted to natural gas that same year.
Sherco’s larger, newer Unit 3, which has more modern pollution controls, would continue burning coal.
Xcel Energy said they are committed to continue to provide high pressure steam to Liberty Paper in Becker.
Newberger says the shutting down of Units 1 & 2 will eliminate about 150 full-time jobs.
“Xcel has informed me that many of these job eliminations will be by attrition and retirement,” Newberger said. “The rest will be reassigned to other areas within Xcel.”
Newberger also said he was relieved at the news that the currently employed will be able to remain employed if they do not retire.
“I am also relieved that creating a new gas plant will ensure some form of property tax base for the City of Becker,” he said.
But his frustration over the situation is still palpable.
“However, the fact remains that these 150 jobs will not be replaced with new workers as they would be if the plant were to continue its normal operation,” he said. “That means 150 fewer good-paying job opportunities for families in our area. The economic impact will be a staggering blow to Central Minnesota.” . ..
We'll be hearing a lot about those 150 local jobs at Xcel Energy, which will slowly be phased out as the workers filling them retire or move on to other opportunities as we move toward the shutdowns in 2023 and 2026.
We have to wonder, however, that Becker and Sherburne County might have something to dangle for companies looking to locate in Greater Minnesota. Skilled workers, quality housing, access to a freeway (and Highway 10), along with proximity to St. Cloud, the western suburbs, as well as natural amenities like the Mississippi River, the Sherburne National Wildlife Refuge, Sand Dune State Forest: all of these are assets.
Change is difficult--but part of leadership is to direct resources to toward the opportunities offered by it, rather than to exhaust resources and emotion in a rear-guard action against it.
If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen P.O. Box 108, Maynard MN 56260) or use the paypal button below:
Many Minnesotans concerned about clean air and climate change cheered when Minnesota Public Radio's Elizabeth Dunbar (and other reporters at additional media outlets) reported Xcel plan would retire part of coal power plant by 2026.
For MN 350 , that news isn't enough. It's out will a new report detailing how two Minnesota-based banks have hope to profit from "climate chaos." The organization tweeted at us about it:
Since the activists also sent a press release, we publish the report below, as much we dislike troll-attracting group tweets. Climate change itself is deeply concerning. From the press release:
Minnesota banking giants Wells Fargo and US Bank invest billions in some of the industries that are causing runaway climate change including tar sands oil development, mountaintop coal removal and fracking, according to a new report by local climate change activist group MN350.
“Despite their stated concern for the community and environment, Wells and US Bank are putting their financial might behind deadly and dying industries that disproportionately pollute communities of color and put life as we know it in peril,“ said Ulla Nilsen, a MN350 member who co-authored the report. “The economics of a clean energy economy get better every day and would make a better investment than extreme fossil fuels.” ...
If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen P.O. Box 108, Maynard MN 56260) or use the paypal button below:
When the final version of HF846 was passed in the DFL-controlled Minnesota Senate, all but ten of the Democratic majority voted against the bill after articulating their objections during the floor debate.
Governor Dayton vetoed the bill a week ago, largely over a punchlist of radical rollbacks to decades of environmental policy, and negotiations continue over the weekend to craft a compromise that can pass both chambers.
Bluestem has obtained a draft of the letter that Senate Environment & Energy Chair John Marty has drafted for the DFL senators who voted against the bill to sign. The four main points echo sentiments that MinnPost political columnist Doug Grow reported mid-week in What to expect when you're expecting a special session:
. . . according to Sen. John Marty, DFL-Roseville, chairman of the Senate’s Environment and Energy Committee, most of the objectionable language wasn’t in the original bill sent by the Senate to the conference committee. When the bill was re-worked there, it came back with a bunch of surprises, including the elimination of the Citizen’s Review Board, which has been an overseerer of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency since the 1960s. That conference committee bill did pass in the Senate, but it passed because 10 DFLers joined with Republicans.
Voting for the bill? Majority Leader Bakk, Kent Eken, Vicki Jensen, Lyle Koenen, Jim Metzen, Tom Saxhaug, Rod Skoe, Dan Sparks, Leroy Stumpf, and Dave Tomassoni (Page 4744 of the Journal of the Senate).
Given the urgent public purpose in providing for the state's poultry farmers, while funding agriculture, environment and natural resources agencies (including Minnesota's wildly popular state park system), Bluestem finds the focus in Senator Marty's draft to be spot on.
The House Republicans chose to put all their eggs in one basket (as far as avian flu relief went) when it came to passing a ginormous ag and environment budget bill, so it's time remove the dirty environment policy and keep the agencies running.
Rosen's "not real ag" remarks were made in an informal Rural Task Force hearing in mid-November 2014, which was not recorded. However, Politics in Minnesota reported the remark, and a number of Bluestem's sources who were in the meeting room heard it as well. Others heard a similar statement from Rosen at a later meeting in the Mankato area.
If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen P.O. Box 108, Maynard MN 56260) or use the paypal button below:
That being the case, it stretched belief when Representative Denny McNamara (R-Hastings) claimed that the Governor's veto "blindsided" him. However, information has emerged that may explain McNamara's hurt feelings.
Bakk said, in the waning hours of the regular session’s end on May 18, he warned Daudt that the environmental measure, which also contained language strengthening the state’s water protection zones and avian flu recovery provision for farmers, may be headed to a veto.
“I had told the speaker over those last few days that the environment bill especially that (those) poison pill provisions one on top of another is going to create a potential veto,” Bakk said. Daudt on Wednesday acknowledged that warning.
But the measure ended up including those provisions — so many that Bakk told Daudt that he would have to get Senate Republicans to vote for the bill because so many Democrats would not. In the end only 11 Senate Democrats voted for the measure. All the chamber’s 26 Republicans supported it.
It really was a terrible thing for Speaker Daudt to do to Representative McNamara. As leader of the House Republican Caucus, he really ought to have let the Hastings Republican know that his bill was heading for trouble.
Daudt shouldn't blindside his committee leaders like this.
Photo: Bakk and Daudt, whom Bakk so warned this veto was going to happen. At this point, we're not sure how nice a timeline of GOP statements about whether they were warned about the possibility of a veto might look. Or a close examination of the disgust within Bakk's own caucus at the Majority Leader's greenlighting the doomed deals. Perhaps avoiding special interest-favored sneak attacks on environmental might help when creating narratives in the future.
If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen P.O. Box 108, Maynard MN 56260) or use the paypal button below:
When the ginormous ag and environment budget bill that the governor vetoed is scrutinized, inquiring minds discover the political games in this story are those played by politicians in both parties who fused the House ag bill and environment bill together. After doing so, they crammed a radical rollback of decades of environmental progress into the final document that landed on Dayton's desk.
Sign this, or the suffering in the state's poultry sector will be prolonged.
There's the gray lady of Southeastern Minnesota, the Rochester Post Bulletin. In Wednesday's editorial, readers are told Our View: Doing too much can leave much undone, and the plight of pandemic-stricken poultry people is part of the problem.
Post-Bulletin: End supersized, inefficient omnibus bills
The blame game is in full effect. After Minnesota's legislative session ended with unfinished business and Gov. Mark Dayton vetoing three major bills, there's plenty of opportunities for finger-pointing.
Amid the blaming, however, few fingers are pointing at the process, which appears to hare blame with political parties and individuals.
Rep. David Bly, the ranking DFLer on the House Agriculture Policy Committee, came close Monday, noting emergency funding for the state's avian influenza crisis was possible. "Today, I'm hearing House Republican Majority members express concerns that Gove. Dayton's veto puts farmers at risk," he stated in a press release days after the Environment and Agriculture Omnibus bill was rejected. "Gov. Dayton repeatedly directed the legislature to send him a standalone bill to provide the emergency funding. In the final days of the legislative session, I stood up five times and asked my colleagues to suspend the rules and send a clean bill to the governor."
He's right; the emergency funding could have been — and should have been — handled differently. But so should many measures that were derailed by inaction or vetoes. . . .
Now, it's time for our state leaders to realize that large, omnibus bills aren't saving time for taxpayers. They are delaying results and leaving work left undone.
It's a simple case of attempting to do too much and achieving too little.
In short, don't put one's eggs in one basket--and there were many, many eggs in that container.
It's also a consequence, Bluestem believes, of playing chicken on behalf of "reforms" dropped into conference committee reports or omnibus bill mark-up sessions without sufficient examination, in discussions where unfounded representation of a single case will go unchallenged. The number of unpermitted generators at a distribution center in Thief River Falls simply isn't common knowledge.
After reading a plaintive press release by Rep. Dave Baker (R-Willmar) about the plight of turkey growers in light the governor's veto, Bluestem contacted Rep. David Bly over the weekend concerning his numerous attempts to pass stand-alone bills to address the pressing needs of the state's poultry producers.
Our hope was to construct a timeline of the many points at which the legislature could have acted (obviously, the Post Bulletin was asking similar questions about process independently down in Rochester).
As it turned out, Bly had constructed such a timeline himself, intending to deliver the prepared statement below on the floor of the Minnesota House. As it was, he made an abbreviated set of remarks instead (we'll revise this post later tonight with more links to the incidents on the timleine); he arranged to have the document sent our way when offices opened again on Tuesday.
Here's the Bly timeline, which illustrates the PB editorial board's point about getting simple things done in excruciating detail:
I am bringing this motion to once more give you the opportunity to address this important Avian flu crisis and allow this funding to move forward today and get to the Governor’s desk before we adjourn this session.
I heard this morning from the member from Dakota in reference to the Ag/environment bill and I quote I “I can’t predict … when this bill will be settled … it is only part of the decision… we may meet in conference committee in a couple days.” Which again greatly concerns me as there are now some 70 hours left in our session. I believe that we should make sure we move this money forward to the agencies that need it.
Let me remind you what is in the bill as there seems to be some confusion about what the Governor has asked for.
In addition to the disaster recovery loan program; there are appropriations of $3,619,000 for Avian flu emergency response activities from the general fund in fiscal year 2015, a one-time expenditure available until it is expended.
$1,853,000 to the Board of Animal Health for emergency response activities from the general fund in fiscal year 2015, a one-time expenditure available until it is expended.
$103,000 to the commissioner of health for emergency response activities including the monitoring of human infection among workers from the general fund in fiscal year 2015, a one-time expenditure available until it is expended.
$350,000 to the commissioner of natural resources for sampling wild animals to detect and monitor the avian influenza virus from the general fund in fiscal year 2015, a one-time expenditure available until it is expended.
$544,000 is appropriated from the general fund in fiscal year 2015 to the commissioner of public safety to operate the State Emergency Operation Center in coordination with the statewide avian influenza response activities.
………………….
Now since several claims here on the floor and in the press have been made to accuse me of playing political games with the Avian Flu crisis. Let me first say my intent from the beginning and I have been clear about this is to get the funds as quickly as possible as we can to the agencies that need it. I have not wavered from that since the beginning. I am thankful that the whole house joined me in addressing the issue on April 16th and again on April 29th to pass the earlier funding bill. But in my defense let me remind you of the sequence of events.
On March 4th the first incidence of a MN farm being infected by the H5N2 influenza occurred.
On April 10th at the House Ag Finance Committee after money was added to the Ag omnibus Finance Bill to address concerns about the Avian Flu outbreak and placed under the jurisdiction of a proposed and yet to be formed Transfer Board (made up primarily of lobbyists and interest groups), Rick Hansen asked if a hearing had been scheduled, and then proposed the Ag Committee convene a hearing on the Avian Flu crisis as we were getting daily reports of increased flu outbreaks.
April 11th I drafted and dropped in a stand-alone funding bill to meet the Governor’s request to send emergency funds to the Dept. of Ag and to The Board of Animal Health
April 16th a joint hearing of the Ag Policy and Finance Committee was convened to hear testimony about the Avian Flu crisis affecting Minnesota Turkey Farmers. Testimony was heard from Commissioner of Ag Dave Fredrickson, Chief Vet. Medical Officer at USDA Dr. John Clifford, Pomeroy Chair of Avian Health at the Univ. of MN Dr. Carol Cardona, State Veterinarian at MN Board of Animal Health Dr. Bill Hartman, Executive Director of Natural Resources Seve Olson, Lou Cornicelli of the Dept. of Natural Resources and a constituent of mine and turkey grower John Zimmerman.
Later that day HF 2225 was introduced and I asked for a suspension of the rules to move my stand alone bill with emergency funds forward. You all joined me in suspending the rules and passing my bill off the floor.
April 21st The bill returned with an amendment. In the interest of getting the money to the Governor for his signature as quickly as possible I moved to concur. But the House decided not to concur and a conference committee was formed with myself the author as Chair and Rep. Hamilton and Rep. Miller.
April 23rd Governor Dayton declared a peace time emergency and outlined a new request for additional funds, I was the only legislator to attend the press conference and took notes on what those requests would be.
Between April 21st and April 24th while we waited for the Senate to appoint a conference committee I met several times with the Senate Author Senator Dahle he indicated who the conferees were likely to be including Senator Skoe who was the strongest proponent of their amendment, which the House objected to. I made several overtures to Rep. Hamilton and Sen. Skoe to meet and address the concerns thinking that this would facilitate the conference committee meeting and allow us to come to a quick agreement. Senator Skoe indicated he would rather have Rep. Hamilton contact him so I gave Rep. Hamilton Sen. Skoe’s cell phone number and encouraged him to call and arrange a meeting. That meeting never took place.
April 24th Friday The Senate appointed Sen. Dahle, Sen. Skoe, and Sen. Dahmes to the conference committee.
April 27th the Conference Committee was scheduled the morning of that day for April 28th at 3:00pm
April 27th that night I was informed by Nancy Conley that she had been informed by Majority staff that the conference committee meeting for April 28th had been cancelled
April 28th on the House floor I attempted to find out on whose authority a scheduled conference committee would be cancelled. Finding no answer to my question as the conference committee chair, I made the announcement that the conference committee would meet at 3pm.
April 28th 3pm I convened the meeting and as a proposal I introduced an amendment that would become HF 2296, the bill I hope to bring to the floor today. I was told that such an amendment would be out of order as it would greatly expand the bill and was told that it would need approval from both the Speaker and the Majority leader to go forward. While the Senate conferees conferred on accepting the House offer proposed by Rep. Hamilton I checked to see what getting agreement from the Speaker and the Majority Leader of the Senate to agree and would take to move this language forward. I concluded I would not have time though I did not believe it would be impossible, so I accepted the next best thing and wrapped up the conference committee with the agreement from the Senate.
April 29th the amended HF 2225 was taken up and passed on the floor.
May 1st the Governor signed the bill.
May 4th HF 2296 was introduced as a stand alone bill and I made a motion to suspend the rules and take it up and pass it off the floor. This was rejected by Rep. Hamilton and my motion did not receive enough votes.
May 11th Rep. Baker amended the emergency loan language, which he amended from the Ag Finance Omnibus bill to the Ag Policy Omnibus Bill. I attempted to amend the rest of the language in HF 2296 to Rep. Baker’s amendment but that was ruled out of order. Later, I attempted to suspend the rules to bring forward HF 2296 on its own. But I did not have the votes to suspend the rules.
May 13th I made the same motion and it was rejected.
May 14th My motion was also rejected.
Today I stand before you – 70 hrs left in the session and asking for your support to make sure that we send this important funding allocation forward so it has a chance of passing and being signed by the Governor before we close the 2015 session.
I believe it is important that the funds be released from the transfer board where it currently sits in HF 1437 and move forward as a stand alone bill. All members who currently have constituents dealing with this or waiting and praying that they are not hit by it the H5N2 virus should support this and not wait for a meeting that may or may not happen in the next couple of days.
My intent all along since I had HF 2225 drafted was to get the money to the agencies that need it as quickly as possible, that remains my one goal. If that’s what you mean by “playing politics” I will accept your accusation. To me politics is an honorable endeavor and I cast no aspersions on your side for doing what you believe is best.
I believe we owe it to all poultry farmers to act. Think about for a moment, all of the products that depend on chicken eggs and how a wipe out not only of the turkey industry but the egg industry would mean not just for Minnesota but for our national economy. I believe we owe it to all of our constituents to act on their behalf and move without prejudice to declare an urgency and move this funding where it needs to go. Every day matters. We should not wait another day.
But wait they did. House and Senate majority leaders thought getting that big honking bill with its veto-bait environmental policy rollbacks that mostly had little to do with ag policy and funding was more important than simply helping poultry farmers.
Photo: Rep. David Bly, DFL-Northfield, in conversation with opponents of the Ag & Environment Omnibus Finance bill last Thursday. The controversial provisions that led to the veto of the bill stemmed from the environmental sections of the legislation, rather than from agricultural funding.
If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen P.O. Box 108, Maynard MN 56260) or use the paypal button below:
Environmental advocates upset about a budget bill that includes several controversial policy provisions today picketed the governor’s mansion to demand a veto.
DFL Gov. Mark Dayton surprised them all by coming outside with cookies and a listening ear. He said he is still looking at all the budget bills and hasn’t decided whether to veto the environment and agriculture budget bill. But he reiterated the same doubts he raised on Wednesday during a news conference.
“Those items that you find offensive — and I agree with you — they didn’t get in there by accident. They got in there because we have a Republican-controlled House and DFL-controlled Senate,” he said. “We’re not going to be able to come back with a DFL bill … We’re in an era where we’re going to have to deal with some of these things we don’t like.”
Bobby King, a policy program organizer with the Land Stewardship Project, responded that some of the provisions, such as the elimination of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Citizens’ Board, were inserted in closed-door meetings without a public hearing. . . .
Gov. Mark Dayton has already vowed to veto education funding legislation, citing early education as a top priority. A governor who has also championed water quality should swiftly veto another budget bill — the agriculture and environment spending legislation.
Signing it would put the gubernatorial stamp of approval on multiple measures that would weaken protections for Minnesota’s treasured waterways. Dayton, serving his final term and looking to burnish his legacy, would tarnish it if he let this shortsighted legislation sail through. It needs a do-over in the looming special session. . . .
That these measures even reached the governor’s desk is frustrating when Minnesota was poised this year to make serious progress on water cleanup. In January, Dayton boldly called for strengthening the state’s “buffer” law, which requires vegetative strips along many waterways. The strips help filter out agricultural runoff, a key source of river and stream pollution, especially in the southwestern part of the state. . . .
But there’s little positive to say about other water-related measures in the bill. Among other things, the legislation calls for dissolving the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency’s long-standing Citizens’ Board. The move smacks of retaliation on behalf of special interests. In 2014, the board voted to require an environmental-impact statement for a proposed 9,000-head dairy operation.
The bill also undermines a promising biofuels compromise between agricultural and environmental groups that could have helped attract biofuels investment in the state while creating incentives for growing perennials and cover crops. These fight water pollution naturally.
Other backward water-quality measures in the bill are almost too numerous to list. Wastewater facilities in the Red River watershed shouldn’t get a pass on meeting new standards. Diverting money dedicated to landfill cleanup is lousy policy. So is a move that could harm wild rice by exempting some mining waste from water protection rules.
Bluestem attended; we were impressed by the energy of the crowd and the presence of so many children, who enthusiastically accepted cookies from the Governor. Dayton said that he'll be looking over the legislation and will mostly likely announce his decision on Friday or Saturday.
There's still time to call or email Governor Dayton and join your voice with those of the protesters and the paper's editorial board. Readers can contact the Govenor's Office via these numbers and email form:
[T]he Legislature missed the mark on several key areas of the Agricultural and Environment Omnibus Budget Bill having final votes today, including:
Abolishing the Citizens’ Board of the Pollution Control Agency: The Citizens’ Board has worked well and is a model we can be proud of. Eliminating it is simply bowing to special interests.
Raiding Dedicated Environmental Funds: Even with $1 billion on the bottom line, this bill raids funds that are to prevent old landfills from contaminating our groundwater and surface water and clean up the pollution where it occurs.
Breaks the Compromise Agreement on Biofuels: The signed agreement between energy, agriculture, and environment stakeholders would establish the next-generation biofuel industry in Minnesota. This bill violates that agreement, undercutting our ability to establish perennial crops for ethanol production and develop new beneficial agricultural systems to protect and restore our lakes, rivers and streams in some our most polluted watersheds in the heart of ag country.
Provides Funding to Promote False Pollinator Labelling: The Legislature voted to allow deceptive advertising for “pollinator-friendly plants” that need only not kill bees upon first contact.
Rolling Back Wild Rice Standards: This language defies the Federal Clean Water Act by limiting the PCA’s authority to enforce our state water quality standards. Surprise Sulfide Mining Amendment: The bill exempts sulfide mining waste from solid waste rules. This amendment was never introduced as a bill or heard in any committee, and its future effect is unknown. Exempting as-of-yet unknown waste streams from potential sulfide mines is an unnecessary risk to water quality and public health.
Red River Rules Suspension: Delays enforcement of updated nutrient pollution permits for wastewater treatment facilities in the Red River watershed until 2025, unless approved by the U.S. EPA, North Dakota Department Health, and EPA Regions 5 & 8.
Polluter Amnesty: A polluter amnesty provision delays enforcement and waives penalties for regulated parties that self-report violations of environmental regulations. This provision needlessly strips the MPCA of its powers to hold polluters accountable for protecting our natural resources.
“Overall, the Ag and Environment Omnibus moves us in the wrong direction for Minnesota’s Great Outdoors, and it’s not what the people of Minnesota want,” said Morse. “Our coalition of 70 environmental and conservation nonprofits, representing over 450,000 Minnesotans urge the Governor to stand his ground for improving water quality and veto this bill.”
Photo: Children at the rally were charmed by Dayton and his cookies, while adults listened to Dayton's words about the bill.
If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen P.O. Box 108, Maynard MN 56260) or use the paypal button below:
While acknowledging some good things in HF846, the massive agriculture and environment omnibus finance bill, thirty-six environmental groups--including Greater Minnesota-based grassroots organizations like Clean Up The River Environment (CURE) and Mankato Area Environmentalists--have sent a letter to Governor Mark Dayton urging him to veto the bill.
Here's the letter that has been sent to the Governor's office:
From the Facebook page for the Keep Minnesota Clean Event at the Governor’s Mansion:
Join together to ask Governor Dayton to veto the dirty environment bill and ask the legislature to fix it to keep MN clean. #KeepMNClean
What the bill does: - Eliminates the MN Pollution Control Agency's Citizens' Board - Raids dedicated environmental funds - Allows deceptive labeling for pollinator-friendly plants - Exempts sulfide mining waste from solid waste rules - Grants polluters amnesty from enforcement and penalties
We'll gather at 10:30AM
Kids encouraged!! This is an event with a positive message.
A program of speakers will begin at 11:00 a.m. To represent river otters living on the Upper Minnesota River, CURE is sending a nice-looking Swedish-American guy from Montvideo dressed in an otter suit:
The law, however, is not a done deal. It passed both houses, but its funding comes from a bill that failed to pass the Senate.
Meanwhile, some DFL legislators and environmental groups are urging Dayton to veto the entire environmental policy bill because it contains many provisions they find unacceptable, including the buffer rules.
The Minnesota Environmental Partnership described the buffer law as “insufficient,” and Friends of the Mississippi River said that while it’s a step in the right direction, it doesn’t do nearly enough.
“We are extremely grateful to the governor for being such a champion for our waters,” said Whitney Clark, executive director of Friends of the Mississippi. “It’s unfortunate that it is not stronger.”
Farm groups, which said they wanted more input on how the law came together, were also lukewarm on the final version. . .
In a press conference with greater Minnesota reporters Tuesday afternoon, Dayton said although he had yet to fully examine the bills that along with the education measure passed in the frenetic final hours of the session, he liked what he saw on shoreland buffers.
The language on buffers was a "very, very compelling reason" to sign the larger bill containing the buffer strip measure, he said.
However, there were other provisions in the bill that Dayton said he opposed, including the elimination of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency's Citizens' Board.
"But, I don't expect to have bills that I agree with entirely," he said. "That's a guarantee when you have a divided government. ... I'm prepared to accept things I don't like in the spirit of compromise." . . .
Sounds like those asking Dayton to veto the bill have our work cut out for us.
Photos: River otters (above); Those hard-working kids at CURE broke out the otter suit on their behalf.
If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen P.O. Box 108, Maynard MN 56260) or use the paypal button below:
See below for the update on the buffers initiative.
Bobby King of the Land Stewardship Project sends us this alert:
The legislature decided that instead of weakening the MPCA Citizens’ Board they would outright ELIMINATE it. This outrageous idea, which was not introduced as a bill or heard previously in any committee, was unveiled late Saturday night and adopted in conference committee. Forty seven years old, the Citizens’ Board was established in 1967 with the creation of the MPCA to ensure the agency serves the public interest and to establish an open and transparent decision making process. It has worked will and is a model the state should be proud of.
This language is included in the Agriculture and Environment Budget Bill along with many other bad provisions, including a sham buffer program that puts off addressing the issue of dealing with agricultural runoff. Read more in this letter from the Minnesota Environmental Partnership to legislators.
There is negotiating going on now to potentially take some of the bad provisions out of the bill. We need calls to the Governor’s office now to keep this on his radar.
Call Gov. Dayton at 651-201-3400 or 800-657-3717 and say “The Ag and Env Budget bills ELIMINATES the MPCA Citizens’ Board. This is a terrible idea. The Citizens’ Board has been around for over 40 years and creates an open and transparent decision making process that helps guard against undue corporate influence. This entirely new proposal was adopted late at night and is outrageous. Governor veto this if it is sent to you.”
Via Minnesota Public Radio, the Associated Press reports the outline of the deal in New buffer strip plan speeds implementation, carries fines.
Here's the final letter that the Minnesota Environmental Partnership and partners sent to legislators objecting to many provisions in the conference committee report. From eliminating the Citizens Board to providing funding to promote false pollinator labeling, this is a bad bill.
Photo: Minnesota House Environment and Natural Resources Finance and Policy Committee Chair Denny McNamara (R-Hastings) and Minnesota Senate Finance - Environment, Economic Development and Agriculture Budget Division Committee Chair David Tomassoni (DFL-Chisholm) confer over the smorgasbord of special interest goodies. Photo by Paul Battaglia via Session Daily.
Bluestem readers may remember some of our earlier posts on these charming chaps.
If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen P.O. Box 108, Maynard MN 56260) or use the paypal button below:
A developer has proposed just such a hotel project, a $12 million, 69-unit Fairfield Inn & Suites by Marriott, nine condominiums and a 4,000 square foot restaurant on the site of the former Capri Motel and surrounding commercial and residential property.
But the Detroit Lakes City Council has run into a beehive of legal threats and ethical accusations surrounding the project and the way it has handled voting at the committee and council level.
The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources emailed a letter April 8 addressed to Mayor Matt Brenk and the Detroit Lakes City Council, threatening to sue the city if it approved the hotel project.
The city council’s Community Development Committee voted to approve the project the next day and to send it on to the full city council with a recommendation for approval.
But that letter from the DNR threatening a lawsuit was not shared with CDC members prior to the vote.
Details, details.
The paper is coming around with a bit more comprehensive coverage after some public shaming in its own pages. In Newspaper, city not giving all info on hotel project, a letter to the editor, Willis Mattison wrote:
I notice that your online story about the Fairfield Inn shoreland development controversy now includes reference to the Minnesota DNR’s letter threatening lawsuit.
But why did you not reveal that the mayor and city staff received this letter on April 8?
Your online coverage would now come under the heading of “better late than never,” so thanks for that. But what may be worse than never carrying the story at all is omitting the larger picture about lack of “government accountability.”
As you know, this is the Minnesota DNR’s second letter to the city on the project, the first having only recommended that the Planning Commission deny the requested variances.
In the April 8 letter, for the first time, Minnesota DNR clearly threatens formal legal action should the city approve the project. Your reporting staff knows that the CDC, which met last Thursday (April 9), “green lighted” the project, as you reported.
As you must have noticed, the April 8 Minnesota DNR letter was addressed to the mayor and the members of the City Council. But the city council did not receive the letter until after the vote of the Community Development Committee.
Again, how in the name of good journalism could you possibly have left that part of the story out?
One further question: Is this significant omission in keeping with Forum Communications’ standards both journalistically and ethically?
Photo: Does this movie still from Citizen Kane now serve as a analogy for tensions between press (Mrs. Brenk) and government (Mr. Brenk) in Detroit Lakes? For an explication of the famous image, Breakfast with the Kanes.
We're conducting our spring fundraising drive. If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen P.O. Box 108, Maynard MN 56260) or use the paypal button below:
A fascinating letter to the editor of the Morris Sun Tribune from Alexandria reader Susanne Engstrom fact-checks a recent Republican House leadership photo opportunity and discovers a wee bit of pandering on the part of the Majority Caucus's leadership.
House Republican leaders try to talk a good game when it comes to sticking up for Greater Minnesota, but are they there for us when it really counts? Case in point, House Majority Leader Joyce Peppin's tour of the ethanol plant in Morris as part her tour to “support” Greater Minnesota. I'm glad she enjoyed her time in Morris, but when it came time to vote, Peppin voted against ethanol and Greater Minnesota.
House Majority Leader Peppin has been a strident opponent of ethanol. In fact, she voted against $750,000 in funding for the Morris ethanol plant in 2013 (HJP 4722 3/15/13). She voted against funding for the Morris plant again in the 2014 session (HJP 11838, 5/16/14).
And what has Majority Leader Peppin and the House Republican leadership actually proposed for Greater Minnesota this year? They are proposing a cut to the jobs and economic development budget that supports key funding for Greater Minnesota jobs initiatives, including eliminating support for broadband infrastructure. [See "Follow through on broadband pledge to MN"? In campaign, Miller made no-broadband pledge for an update on broadband funding]
It would have been nice for Majority Leader Peppin and Jeff Backer to thank Rep. Jay McNamar during their visit. It was McNamar that authored the bill that provided new funding for the Morris plant – despite opposition from Republicans like Peppin.
I have some advice for House Majority Leader Peppin. You can save some gas money next time you’re coming out here to pander to us Greater Minnesota folks. We’d rather you put your money where your mouth is and actually vote for Greater Minnesota.
Mick Miller (left), general manager of Denco II, gave a tour of the facility to House Majority Leader Joyce Peppin (center) and Rep. Jeff Backer (right) on Friday, March 27. Miller and Denco II board members met with Peppin and Backer to discuss the local impact of ethanol. (Submitted Photo)
Photo: We're curious who took this photo.
We're conducting our spring fundraising drive. If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen P.O. Box 108, Maynard MN 56260) or use the paypal button below:
On April 6th, the House Jobs and Affordable Energy Committee posted a final energy package that was radically different from the Senate’s Clean Energy Plan (SF 1431) passed two weeks earlier. Evaluating and reforming energy and climate policy is important, but the House proposal guts Minnesota’s successful, nationally recognized clean energy and climate policies. We believe that evaluation and reform should be done in an attempt to transition Minnesota’s energy system and economy from dirty fossil fuels to no carbon, renewable sources to improve air and water quality, reduce the impacts of climate change, create economic benefits and jobs for all Minnesotans, and to create a resilient, affordable, and reliable energy system and economy.
In a concise and thoughtful post, Rosier lays out four principles for Minnesota’s clean energy transition, followed by eight points critiquing the draft of the omnibus bill draft, along with a recommendation and link to contact legislators:
Key people within the Minnesota House of Representatives are working to gut Minnesota’s successful landmark clean energy policies, but people of faith are stepping up and calling on them to do the right thing.
Over the past twenty years, Minnesotans have built a responsible transition beyond fossil fuels to a clean, renewable energy, and a thriving industry that employs >15,300 people. Faith actors have been at the forefront of these successful steps forward.
But the Minnesota House bill would:
Eliminate Minnesota’s science-based goals aimed to reduce and offset climate pollution;
Repeal Minnesota’s energy savings program that has saved the energy equivalent of 8 Prairie Island nuclear plants;
Repeal the nuclear moratorium;
Destroy the progress made on solar energy in 2013
Roll back Minnesota’s renewable goals by watering down standard renewable energy by allowing existing, large hydro from Canada.
Tell your State Senator and Representative to vote NO on the House energy bill and instead supporting clean energy & jobs policies by supporting the Senate clean energy package.
The right thing to do is to continue to make progress by supporting the Senate clean energy package that sets Minnesota’s renewable energy benchmark to achieve at least 40% renewables by 2030 and increases energy savings.
Thanks for all you do to build the climate movement!
Minnesota has been a leader in solar energy, but proposed legislation threatens the state's growing rooftop solar industry, local job creation, and energy choice by eliminating fundamental solar policies.
Send a letter to save solar now!
This proposed House Energy Omnibus Bill changes the way utilities account for the energy that rooftop solar customers export to the grid. The current policy, called net metering, provides a fair accounting of a customer’s solar energy production and has driven almost 100% of all rooftop solar deployment in the United States over the last three decades. Net metering is critical to Minnesota’s energy future.
Lend your voice and tell your elected officials you support net metering and a thriving clean energy market that brings choice and control over electricity costs to Minnesotans!
Feidt,whose large online following reaches into Occupy and left libertarian circles, includes a rollicking twitter exchange with Jobs & Energy Affordability committee chair Pat Garofalo (R-Farmington).
Photo: Rep. Pat Garofalo (R-Farmington).
We're conducting our spring fundraising drive. If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen P.O. Box 108, Maynard MN 56260) or use the paypal button below:
All of the statements, opinions, and views expressed on this site by Sally Jo Sorensen are solely her own, save when she attributes them to other sources.
The opinions, statements, and views of contributing writers are their own.
Sorensen, editor and proprietor of Bluestem Prairie, serves clients in the business and nonprofit sectors. While progressive in outlook, she does not caucus with any political party.
Recent Comments