Legalectric

Last night was a LONG night with the Waseca County Planning Commission. But the good news is that the Conditional Use Permit application for a tank driving course and shooting range for guns ranging to machine guns was denied UNANIMOUSLY! I’ll post the documents here soon.

Staff Report for June 7, 2007 Meeting

GRRRRRRRR, there’s not a lot on the county site and I’m just not in the mood for uploading, let me sleep on it…

Just when I think I’ve seen it all, suddenly in an Affidavit, I’m a prostitute!!!

Letter of David Gross & Affidavit of Marie Borglum

This is a must read!!!

.

Dig this - it’s all the way to DENVER!

Minnesota Family Plans Tank Obstacle Course

The Borglum’s Application for a Conditional Use Permit had a hearing last night before the Waseca County Planning Commission, and the room was beyond standing room only. We were allotted 3 minutes, and despite that quashing, the hearing went on until 11:30 p.m., at which time it was tabled, with the Planning Commission wanting more information, including:

- Residence issue - is the nearest neighbor’s home a legal residence

- Is it a wetland? (rumor has it that a “cease and desist” order was issued yesterday)

- Site map details needed - a greatly altered map was produced at the last minute

- Latest mitigation and technology for lead pollution

- Track - is it a “track” or is it a “course” (zoning setback issue)

- Is it a “gun club” (similar use)

- Need copy of NRA Source Manual referenced in Minn. Stat. 87A

Saladin - this one goes up to 45MPH! Says so right HERE!

The Ferret goes up to 60MPH! Says so right HERE!

Hot off the press from the DNR:

CO Joe Frear (Waseca) checked fishermen, ATV activity and burning. He spoke at FAS classes in Waseca and Montgomery, presenting one instructor at Waseca with his 20-year award. He also assisted the district in moving boats out of storage and prepared them for use. He also followed up on a wetlands complaints dealing with a person who wants to put in a firearms range and a racetrack for military tanks in a Type 2 wetland. Lastly, he dealt with complaints of dead snow and blue geese being dumped in county ditches.

From the St. Paul Pioneer Press:

For the guy who has everything … rent a tank

Waseca County family wants to put you behind the wheel of a heavily armored vehicle

BY TAD VEZNER
Pioneer Press
TwinCities.com-Pioneer Press
Article Last Updated:04/03/2007 11:06:47 PM CDT

In a county filled with heavy farm equipment, how does one blow away their neighbors with the heft of their ride? Or impress a dinner date, perhaps?

Answer: Buy a tank with a 105 mm barrel.

Or to be more specific, a British FV433 Abbot “self-propelled gun,” complete with armor, treads and a defunct gun.

The Borglum family, of Waseca County, Minn., hopes to get into the tank-driving business - starting with an obstacle course for the curious - where bored city slickers and country folk can tear up and down hills and (hopefully) between trees.

They’ve already imported four British-built vehicles to play with: the Abbot and three armored personnel carriers, including a wheeled Ferret, a Saladin and a FV432. And they’ve ordered three more.

Thrill seekers, they say, could spin a few treads for the same price as a bungee jump - exactly how much, they’re not certain, but hopefully in the neighborhood of $100.

“We’ve been in the construction business so long, we’re not really familiar with the marketing of this kind of thing,” said Marie Borglum, who co-founded Marie’s Excavating (now Marie’s Concrete Recycling) with her husband, Richard, in 1988 on their property off Minnesota 13.

The family’s plans for the property, which have yet to be approved by local zoning officials, have attracted attention - good and bad.

“To be honest, I’ve had a lot of e-mails,” said Marie Borglum, starting with the good. “You’d be surprised how many women say, ‘Hey, I don’t know what to get my husband.’ “

She’s also received e-mails from nonprofit organizations similar to the Make-a-Wish Foundation, for instance. “Somebody never drove a tank, that sort of thing.”

The family also hopes to market what she calls a “dream date.”

“Your wife could say, ‘Hey, let’s get something to eat,’ and we’d pick you up in an armored personnel carrier. The driver would dress up like in a tux,” Marie Borglum said. “Instead of limousine, it’s a tank.”

And bumps in the road aren’t a problem, said son Tony Borglum, who traveled with his father to Northamptonshire, England, in September to scout and buy the vehicles.

“The track vehicles definitely ride the smoothest,” he said.

The family’s investment was considerable. Total transit cost, including getting the vehicles past U.S. customs, the Agriculture Department and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, was about $10,000 for each vehicle, Borglum estimated. That’s on top of the roughly $20,000 sticker price for each vehicle.

But some in the rural town of 10,000 have their reservations about the enterprise - particularly in view of the fact the family hopes to tack on an indoor-and-outdoor shooting range and a retail space to sell small arms on the 30-acre property. They’ve applied for a conditional-use permit for the entire affair, which will be reviewed Thursday by the Waseca County Planning and Zoning Commission.

“There is a lot of concern about it. We’re just finding out what it’s all about, and we’ve got a lot of questions,” said John Schiefelbein, who lives about two miles from the rural property. “The concern, of course, is shells going wild,” he added. However, none of the guns in any of the units can fire projectiles.

As for just driving the unarmed vehicles, however, “That isn’t that offensive,” Schiefelbein said. “The only thing is, I don’t see who gets their jollies out of driving military vehicles.

“I guess it’s OK - but the Army’ll pay you to drive ‘em free. In a small rural area, we don’t need this kind of crap.”

Gladys Carlson lives about 1½ miles from the Borglums. And she’s much rankled by the prospect of tanks.

“I just don’t see a place for it,” Carlson said. “I think this is kind of disrespectful. Our soldiers, this is what they’re driving in and riding in. I just feel it’s totally out of place.”

And what if it catches on, Carlson wondered?

“We’ve already got our all-terrain vehicles going down the road banks, the ditches, and this might be the next thing,” she said. “I don’t know why the government would even allow that.”

But Borglum believes he can win residents over, if they’d just come to him and talk about the tanks. As for the firing ranges, he points out there are at least two in the county already.

Richard Roessler, Blooming Grove township supervisor, said the whole thing is out of his hands.

“We, as a board, are not going to take a position on it because it is outside our jurisdiction,” Roessler said.

“I’m really gun-shy to talk about it,” he added.

Tad Vezner can be reached at tvezner@pioneerpress.com or 651-228-5461.

Tony Borglum stands in the driver’s port of his British-made FV433 Abbot self-propelled gun. The tank is one of the Borglum family’s collection of military vehicles. None of the guns in any of the units can fire projectile.

(Note that an ethanol plant doesn’t look all that different from a coal gasification plant? It’s like a refinery in a corn field…)

There’s lots of talk around town about the Advanced BioEnergy ethanol plant that’s been proposed for the south side of County Road 8 by Dundas, between Hwy. 3 and Interstate 35. Bridgewater Township has instituted a moratorium and is doing local planning, and I sure hope doing some looking into what Advanced BioEnergy is about. There’s info out there on the internet — what would we do without it! The internet sure is the Great Equalizer, and the Great Organizer too!

A coal cohort did a little digging and found some GOOD STUFF!

Partnership Interest Acquisition Agreement

See link for full document — as of Nov 2006 looks like Advanced BioEnergy (ABE) is in the works to sell out to a South Dakota connection (with the understanding that the â??Marketing Agreementâ?? holds) and note the NO PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENT, and hey, I’m not a party to the agreement!

Section 6.2 No Public Announcement.

None of the parties to this Agreement shall make any public announcement concerning this Agreement, without each other partyâ??s prior written consent (which shall not be unreasonably withheld); provided, however, that any of the parties, but only after reasonable consultation with each other party, may make disclosure if required under applicable law or the rules and regulations of the SEC or any listing agreement with a national securities exchange; and provided further, however, that following execution of this Agreement or consummation of the Closing, ABE may, in its sole discretion, make a public announcement regarding the transactions contemplated by this Agreement and the integration of the HGFâ??s business into that of ABE.

And another very interesting tidbit! ABE, in its filings with SEC, HERE’S LINK,reported that:

â??We will depend on others for sales of our products, which may place us at a competitive disadvantage and reduce profitabilityâ?¦â?We expect to hire a third-party marketing firmâ?¦â?

Excerpt from link above:

Section 6.1 Consent; Waiver.
â?¦..

(b) By execution and delivery of this Agreement, (i) HGF and Aventine agree that, notwithstanding Section 1.A. of the Ethanol Marketing Agreement by and between HGF and Williams Ethanol Services, Inc. d/b/a Williams Bio-Energy, dated November 30, 2000, including an Amendment effective April 2, 2003 (the â??Marketing Agreementâ?), the Marketing Agreement shall not terminate as a result of the transactions contemplated by this Agreement, but shall remain in full force and effect on and after the Closing Date according to its existing terms and conditions (except for Section 1.A.) until amended or terminated by HGF and/or Aventine, and (ii) Aventine waives any and all rights and claims under Section 1.B. of the Marketing Agreement that may arise from the transactions contemplated by this Agreement.

Section 6.2 No Public Announcement. None of the parties to this Agreement shall make any public announcement concerning this Agreement, without each other partyâ??s prior written consent (which shall not be unreasonably withheld); provided, however, that any of the parties, but only after reasonable consultation with each other party, may make disclosure if required under applicable law or the rules and regulations of the SEC or any listing agreement with a national securities exchange; and provided further, however, that following execution of this Agreement or consummation of the Closing, ABE may, in its sole discretion, make a public announcement regarding the transactions contemplated by this Agreement and the integration of the HGFâ??s business into that of ABE.

Click HERE for a link for document filed by South Dakota Wheat Growers Ass.
which says:

Filed by South Dakota Wheat Growers Association
pursuant to Rule 425 under the
Securities Act of 1933, as amended

Subject Company: Advanced BioEnergy, LLC
Commission File No.: 333-125335

November 7, 2006

Dear SDWG Member:

Your South Dakota Wheat Growers Board of Directors, together with the Board of Managers of Heartland Producers, LLC, has approved an agreement with Advanced BioEnergy, LLC (ABE) to exchange the partnership interests in Heartland Grain Fuels, LP (HGF) held by South Dakota Wheat Growers and Heartland Producers for cash and equity of ABE.

Under the terms of the transaction, the partners of HGF will receive approximately $16.8 million in cash and approximately 2,631,000 newly issued units of ABE. In addition, HGF intends to make a special distribution to its partners of approximately $8.65 million of earnings prior to the initial closing of the transaction with ABE. Wheat Growers currently owns approximately 48% of HGF and will receive its pro rata share of the consideration from the transaction. In addition, Wheat Growers will continue supplying corn to the HGF facilities.

ABE is a development-stage company specializing in ethanol production. It currently is building a 100-million gallons per year dry mill corn-processing ethanol plant near Fairmont, Nebraska and has letters of intent to build similar plants in Indiana and Minnesota.

Wheat Growers Board believes this business relationship with ABE will provide the following benefits to the HGF investors and the agricultural producers in this area:

a. Heartland Grain Fuels investors will become part of a company with plans to become a larger ethanol producer: By being part of a larger ethanol production company, HGF can achieve additional economies of scale that are difficult to achieve with just two plants in North-Central South Dakota.

b. Heartland Grain Fuels investors will achieve greater geographic diversity: By being part of ABE which is building plants in other Midwest states, risks associated with drought and marketing should be mitigated.

c. The transaction will allow Heartland Grain Fuels investors to obtain cash from present operations: Ethanol prices have been at historical highs and this transaction allows HGF to return cash to its investors based on its recent performance.

d. This transaction will allow Heartland Grain Fuels investors to maintain an investment in an ethanol production company: Heartland Grain Fuels investors will retain their investment in an ethanol production company through the ABE Units they will receive in the transaction.

e. The transaction will allow Heartland Grain Fuels to maintain business relationships: The planned Aberdeen plant expansion will be completed, and current supply and marketing relationsips will be continued.

Prior to Heartland Producersâ?? closing on this business relationship, the transaction must be approved by Heartland Producersâ?? membership. Wheat Growersâ?? membership is not required to vote on the business relationship due to Wheat Growersâ?? cooperative structure and will complete its portion of the transaction prior to the vote by the Heartland Producers members. The Board of Managers of Heartland Producers has passed a resolution requesting Wheat Growers to close on this business relationship prior to the vote of Heartland Producersâ?? membership.

With the rapid changes occuring in the ethanol industry, the Wheat Growersâ?? Board believes this cash and equity exchange will allow the investment of HGF owners to grow beyond just the Huron and Aberdeen facilities, while continuing the local connection of your corn production to ethanol. If you have any questions, please donâ??t hestitate to contact Dale at 605-225-5500, extension 101 or dlocken@sdwg.com.

Sincerely,

Hal Clemensen, SDWG Board President Dale Locken, SDWG Chief Executive Officer

In connection with the transaction, ABE will file a registration statement that contains an information statement/prospectus with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission and relevant state securities regulatory agencies. HEARTLAND PRODUCERSâ?? MEMBERS AND OTHER INVESTORS AND SECURITY HOLDERS IN ABE AND HGF ARE ENCOURAGED TO READ THE REGISTRATION STATEMENT, WHICH WILL CONTAIN INFORMATION ABOUT THE TRANSACTION AND THE MEETING OF THE HEARTLAND PRODUCERSâ?? MEMBERS THAT WILL BE CALLED TO VOTE ON THIS TRANSACTION, BECAUSE IT WILL CONTAIN IMPORTANT INFORMATION ABOUT THIS TRANSACTION. You will also be able to obtain the documents free of charge at the SECâ??s web site, www.sec.gov, and from ABE on its web site at www.advancedbioenergy.com or by contacting Bill Paulsen, at (605) 225-0520.

And thereâ??s more on ABE, and specifically ABE LLC Northfield. This explains the monumental RISKS with this company and this project! Bridgewater Township is on the right grack in initiating the 1-year moratorium. The township supervisors then have a chance to do the â??due diligenceâ?? to protect the township.

Click here and check out this 10KSB Fiscal Year End Sept 30th 2006 â??tell allâ?? REPORT.

The first page or two gives you plenty, then you can use FIND on the tool bar to get to Minnesota information.

Lots of conflict of interest, no experience, little to NO guarantees either from ABE OR the designers, builders AND hints of expenses to come if environmental investigation and/or changes in rules and regulationss occur. That’s an opening for future compliance problems and â??decommissioningâ? issues if plant is abandoned or goes belly up. Seems similar to the operating plants in Aberdeen and Huron, where waste disposal is an issue, not to mention Aberdeen after the expansion will use 500,000 gal daily, Huron 300,000 gallons dailyâ?¦ and many of these plants are tied to city water!

Q: WOULD ABE EXPECT TO BE CONNECTED TO DUNDAS CITY WATER SYSTEM? THAT WOULD NOT BE ALLOWED UNDER THE AGREEMENET WITH NORTHFIELD.
There’s enough here to give the Township supervisors something to think about…

On Monday, it was beyond standing room only, the back hallway was filled too! The League of Women Voters hosted “What is the Future for Family Farms?” at the Northfield Arts Guild, in conjunction with the exhibit “Farm Art: A Tribute.”

The Northfield News was there too: Family Farms Face the Future.

Stephanie Henricksen

The show and the forum were organized by Stephanie Henricksen, who, drawing on her long history and varied experiences in art and farming, put together the exhibit that’s been traveling around the state — what about your town? Photos (all but top) thanks to Margit Johnson, LWV.

Members of the panel were Dave and Flo Minar of Cedar Summit Farm in New Prague; Paul Liebenstein of Wolf Creek Dairy in rural Dundas; John Zimmerman, a turkey grower in rural Northfield; Thom Petersen, Government Relations Director for Minnesota Farmers Union; Susan Stokes, Executive Director of Farmers Legal Action Group; and Duane Alberts of Minnesota Farm Bureau Board of Directors.

Thom Peterson, Farmers Union

Though the questions were set out ahead of time, some of the most important issues affecting family farms were NOT addressed, so here are some things to think about:

l) Unlike other livestock, dairy is still subject to a five-shareholder limit in the Corporate Farm Law. Should we keep it that way or open it up to unlimited shareholders?

2) Poultry was removed from the protections of the Minnesota Corporate Law in l978. They are now grown on contract and how has this changed poultry farming?

3) Minnesota, unlike Iowa, allows local zoning in regard to farm operations, including feedlots. Which system do you prefer?

4) Some farmers are choosing to go organic in their crop or livestock operatons. Proposed USDA Organic Standards have drawn much protest. Why?

5) Is there anything in law now to cap taxes on ag land that abuts urban areas or housing developments? If not, should there be?

by Patty Canney of Minneapolis

And what about Eminent Domain? This is a very hot topic in land use, but they don’t know the half of it — wait until all these transmission lines start criss-crossing farms across Minnesota! Then they’ll know what farmers think of eminent domain!

I had a good chat with Thom Peterson at the Tavern beforehand and we argued the issues where farm and energy intersect. He and I were part of a group working with Sen. Vickerman on eminent domain issues last session, so there’s an awful lot to argue about! A bill was introduced, S.F. 462, that would alter the scheme of payment for transmission easements, a pressing need in SW Minnesota where so many farmers are having their land condemned for transmission line. It went nowhere, sidetracked to a “study group,” but this next session might be different. Then again, it seems the folks talking about eminent domain want to exempt utilities from their bill! Not a bright idea… Thom and I were also part of an energy policy roundtable last week which I hope will help bring energy issues to the forefront in the coming campaign season — much like Elizabeth Dickenson did in the St. Paul mayoral race. FLAG is working on a wind handbook for farmers, crucial as new avenues open for farm revenue in energy and equally important when challenges arise like negotiation of easements and condemnation for transmission.

Stephanie Henricksen & Mac McCutchan in the foreground