Legalectric

Picture this scene with a 115kV transmission line on one side of the path… or BOTH?!?! AAAAAGH!

Scroll down for the scoop from Pam Rasmussen, Xcel…

Just when you thought it was the “Midtown Greenway,” maybe Xcel has another idea… maybe it’s going to be the “Xcel Transmissionway.” Xcel has announced the “Hiawatha Project” for Phillips neighborhood in Minneapolis. Where in Phillips?

Here’s the map, but essentially, it’s stretching east-west between Midtown and East Phillips:

Hiawatha Project Map

They’re holding public meetings soon, at both ends of the project:

Midtown Global Market Management

920 East Lake

Greenway Level Conference Room – Lower Level

Wednesday October 29th

12-2pm and 5-7 pm

and

Thursday November 6

12-2 pm and 5-7 p.m.

Be there or be square…

There are supposed to be other meetings in November at the YWCA on East Lake Street, but I don’t have any info on when — have emailed Pam Rasmussen and her response is down further.

For more information from Xcel, see:

Xcel’s HIAWATHA PROJECT page

Here’s how they explain the project, from their blurb on the project page:

What is being proposed to improve the system?

Our proposed project involves construction of one substation near the Hiawatha corridor and another in the Midtown area, connected by two 1.25-mile, 115-kilovolt transmission power supply lines. The two lines may be located on the same corridor.

Is that bizarre? In other proceedings they use “geographic diversity” as a reason not to use a pre-existing corridor, and here they’re saying it’s “two” lines which “may be located in the same corridor.” Uh-huh…

Xcel claims that they’ll be conducting “open discussion with all stakeholders, including the city of Minneapolis” (in the Q & A blurb they also commit to including “area neighborhoods), and they say that “[i]nput from stakeholders pertaining to visual impacts will be considered prior to final location of structures, rights-of-way and other areas.” So do tell, Xcel, who is a “stakeholder?” I would expect that the East Phillips, Midtown and West Phillips neighborhood groups would be stakeholders. I would expect that the Midtown Greenway Coalition is a stakeholder. Does Green Institute have a dog in this? The hospitals, clinics, and associated medical interests in the area? The Midtown Exchange? And the Midtown Eco-Burner?

What I’m not seeing in any of this is a need statement with any specificity, but hey, who needs a need statement when there’s no Certificate of Need required? How would system alternatives be considered? It sure wouldn’t happen in the Routing permit. Maybe they just have to say they want it and the City agrees? In looking at the area, with Honeywell gone and WellsFargo in, with all of that hospital and associated medical stuff, and that they took OUT the substation on Oakland, there’s probably not so much a shortage of power as a power quality problem, given the old distribution system. And why would they build line from the 115kV line on Hiawatha to near WellsFargo, a radial line, connecting to the sub, but not to another line, not to the grid? Why not just update the existing system? Is there something else in the works? Inquiring minds want to know.

In their press release, they state:

The company plans to employ state-of-the-art “Smart Substation” technologh that will allow enhanced monitoring and control of substation equipment. In addition, other elements of SmartGrid technology can be incorporated that will improve reliable service to customers.

SmartGrid? That’s the project they’re working on in Boulder, Colorado, and blurbs for that that THEY put out say that it can cut load by 30%. Let’s just forget about transmission and put in SmartGrid, eh?

Where did that SmartGrid blurb of theirs go? It’s in the CapX 2020 exhibits. Will post it later…

Here’s what Pam Rasmussen had to say in answer to a few of my questions:

Carol:

The project substations and lines are 115 kv and the new lines will be about 1.25 miles long. It will not require a CON, but does fall under the MN PUC Route permit process.

I saw that you found the map. We are going to post it on the web page as a direct link today along with the meeting announcement.
The map should give you an idea of where the two substation siting areas are in the area.

It is two 115 kV kv lines, with single 795 ACSS [originally she reported ACSR, and corrected that to ACSS — thanks for that clarification!] at this time. No bundling. Depending upon the route and design it could be double circuited or it could be two single circuit lines.

This is not replacing the 115 kV line along Hiawatha. The proposed Hiawatha substation will tie into the existing line and then the two new 115 kv lines would go from the Hiawatha sub to the new Midtown substation.

I see you have the dates for the public meetings on your web page. We will be mailing letters to landowners in the area is shown on the map later this week as well as putting ads in the paper.

We don’t have any other meetings scheduled at this time, but will be scheduling them as we move forward. This is just the first set of meetings to provide information on the project and to gather input on concerns or suggestions people have.

Pam

As I understand it, there’s been a “stakeholder” meeting with at least one neighborhood group. Still tracking down info on the others… stay tuned!

There’s something about a Citizen Advisory Task Force, and that something is that when people are “forced” to sit down and actually read a utility application for significant utility infrastructure, be it nuclear waste storage, transmission line, coal gasification plant or nuclear waste storage once again, they, and WE in the cosmic sense, all learn something. What is usually learned makes the Dept. of Commerce squirm… too bad, these applications are full of unsupported justifications for their infrastructure, projects that will make them money but that are not in the public interest, and “the Department” just takes what they say and works with it, no independent verification, as they’ve testified to over and over and over again. That’s where a Task Force is helpful — a Task Force has a way of recognizing the inconsistencies, factual errors (remember “Lake Pepin was formed by Lock and Damn #3” from the Goodhue Co. Alternate Site application?). Task Forces have a way of coming up with system and site/rout alternatives to meet the need claimed by a utility in ways that they hadn’t brought forth (didn’t discover or don’t want discovered). Task Forces have a way of finding a better way, or two, or three. Task Forces have a way of taking a disparate and diverse group of public officials and NGO representatives and citizens and jelling them into cohesive, informed and thoughtful questioners and advocates.

Here are a couple of significant Task Force Reports for background:

Report of the Site Advisory Task Force: Goodhue County Dry Cask Storage Alternate Site Project (I’m downloading this, zzzzzzzzzzzzzz, very, very, very slow – in the meantime, CLICK HERE FOR LINK)

Expanding Horizons – Chisago I Task Force Report 1997

Expanding Horizons – Appendices – Chisago I

Here are some recent attempts of Task Forces to struggle to evaluate a big project with insufficient time, to wrap their heads around system and site/route alternatives, and with laudable results:

Chisago II Task Force Recommendations – May 2007

(Authored by Task Force. Note there are no Appendices — Commerce jettisoned them, they were not included with the Report!!!)

Mesaba Energy Project – Citizen Advisory Task Force Report

(Authored by staff, where Comments on each aspect of charged were solicited from Task Force and report compiled — report shows resulting lack of cohesiveness). Note AGAIN there are no Appendices — Commerce jettisoned them, they were not included with the Report!!!)

For the Chisago II Task Force, we had to fight Commerce to get it. Notices/invitations were not sent out to all affected communities, there wasn’t enough time for a governmental unit to appoint a representative, they didn’t have enough members and local communities were not represented so they weren’t legally sufficient to be a “Task Force” so it was a “work group… Not enough time… appendices “disappeared.”

For the Mesaba Task Force, we had to file a petition in this one too, Commerce didn’t want it. Meetings were “facilitated” by Commerce staff and provided with incorrect guidance, i.e., told they could not address cumulative impacts, GRRRRRRRRRR. Report prepared by staff with comments by members… not enough time… appendices “disappeared.”

For this most recent one, the Prairie island uprate and dry cask storage, once again Commerce fought against a Task Force, very few were sent solicitations, there was nearly no time to apply, and only three meetings are planned, cut short already by 1/2 hour because the library closes at 8:30, not 9:00.m. Bill Storm, Commerce Staff, has unilaterally decided the “charge” of the Task Force, and despite Commission emphasis on the importance of vetting the application (which I raised at the PUC meeting) and independent review and analysis, there’s no mention of vetting the application; he’s unilaterally decided that public comment is not allowed (there has been time at end of meeting for public comment in past Task Forces); he stated that the PUC Ordered that he is to “preside” over the meeting (OH, PUH-LEEEZE, the PUC did no such thing) and when challenged insisted that was the case (“HAVE YOU SEEN THE ORDER?” Well, I have seen the PUC Order, and it does not state that Storm is to preside over the meeting); he stated that there will be no report (OH? The PUC specifically stated that the Task Force could do a report if it wanted to, and if it does not, how will its work be entered in the record… oh, it won’t be… right, funny how that works and how convenient where the public’s work and issues raised aren’t even part of the proceeding?) Good way to delegitimize and dismiss our efforts… I realize that’s just what he wants, it’s his job to “remove the impediments” and “streamline,” but speaking as an “impediment,” I’ve got my job too.

And the good news, other than it’s such a lovely day that it’s easy to forget the economy is imploding, on my doorstep just now is the FedEx package with the tape of that PUC meeting, so now there’s a transcript to do.

And that Goodhue County Task Force Report is still downloading, like molasses…

A depressing email came in from Jan Nye… Ed Berger is off to the big audition, and my guess is he’ll do fine. As he often said, “Tryin’ is lyin’ … if you were tryin’ you’d be doin’ it.” He was doin’ it. I spent a couple years learning a few things about alto from him, and jawin’ at “The Trough” over coffee and his ever-present cigarettes, getting some program reinforcement, a time to stop “tryin” and just start doing it. He has a lot to do with where and who I am today, and I’m grateful for lessons learned. As he would say, “a great human bean...”

Memorial at the AQ tomorrow 5-9 p.m. From the AQ site:

Eddie Berger will be remembered in music and stories by friends and fellow musicians.

* Music starts at 5 p.m. and is expected to go until 9 p.m. or so
* Rhythm section: Mikkel Romstad (piano), Anthony Cox (bass), Phil Hey (drums)
* Anyone else who wants to play—everyone welcome
* Expecting old-school players from Eddie’s past, members of the TC jazz community
* People will share memories, bring food (potluck)

Photo by Tom Gitelson

And in the STrib:

Alto sax player Eddie Berger brought bebop to Minnesota

The Minneapolis man was hailed by musicians and aficionados as a mainstay of the Twin Cities jazz scene.

By BEN COHEN, Star Tribune

When Eddie Berger, a Twin Cities jazz saxophone mainstay, was growing up in Philadelphia, he was a clarinet player.

In his early years, he was partial to swing music, idolizing the likes of Benny Goodman. But after pioneering bebop saxophonist Charlie Parker arrived on the scene, Berger changed his allegiance and his instrument.

Berger moved to Minneapolis in 1959 and established it as a beachhead for bebop in the Upper Midwest. He died of lung disease Oct. 4 in Minneapolis. He was 76.

During the past 16 years, he had been ill with heart disease, emphysema and colon cancer. Still, he performed until a year ago. A respirator was a part of his stage equipment.

He was a towering jazz figure in the Twin Cities, said Phil Hey of Hopkins, a longtime drummer with Berger.

“He taught a whole lot of us around here about the style of Charlie Parker, how you get from note to note, how you put those ideas together, and about the rhythm,” Hey said.

In the early 1950s, Berger served in the Army, playing in a military band in Hawaii. He landed in Minneapolis in 1959, tired of life on the road, touring the country. He established long-running showcases at William’s Pub and the old Artists’ Quarter.

“Ed was a great mentor to a lot of younger musicians, myself included,” said Kenny Horst, a drummer who owns the Artists’ Quarter club in St. Paul. “He was a sweet guy.”

Berger taught at the West Bank School of Music and South High School in Minneapolis and out of his home.

He gave band mates and students more than lessons. “‘Get there early to get how the room feels, and be ready to play,'” Hey said he admonished.

After beating chemical dependency 30 years ago, he also warned of its dangers, and that musicians were especially subject to its allure.

“You either choose life, or you choose death,” Hey quoted him as saying.

Sax player Dave Karr of Minneapolis called him a jazz “purist.”

“When you heard Eddie, you knew you were getting all of him,” Karr said.

After earning a broadcasting degree from the Brown College of Minnesota, he hosted a jazz program on KFAI Radio for 25 years.

He instilled his performances with comedy but was always serious about jazz, said his partner, Nancy Grindland of Minneapolis.

He was an avid sports fan, fond of the Phillies baseball team. He once played semi-professional baseball.

His wife, Darlene, died 35 years ago.

In addition to Nancy, he is survived by his son, Ed Berger, of Mountain Lake, Minn.; daughter, Dawn Voelker, of Belle Plaine; sister, Kay Benvenuto, of Galloway, N.J.; and one granddaughter.

A memorial celebration will be from 5 to 9 p.m. Sunday in the Artists’ Quarter, 408 St. Peter St., St Paul.

Today was the first meeting of the Citizens Advisory Task Force (CATF) for the Prairie Island uprate and dry cask storage expansion. They’re meeting only THREE times over the next three weeks. Let’s see, the purpose of a Task Force is to review and vet the application (yes, Commissioner Reha was quite clear of the importance of vetting the application), to make recommendations about alternatives and issues to address in the EIS, but you wouldn’t know it from tonight’s meeting. And he didn’t have copies of the charge for members. MOES memo from him to Glahn was done 10/6 and efforts to pull it up last night were utterly frustrating, the PUC site was down, I got around in the backdoor, but it took 45 minutes of trying to get the link to work — anyone trying to find it last night was as frustrated as I was. The PUC issued an Order about the Task Force 10/7, but the entire PUC site was down and it was not in the “Orders” section and I couldn’t find away around that block so I’ll post that if it becomes available… AAAAAAAAAAGH!

And yes, it’s happening again, not enough time… and it’s set up that way. The Task Force members didn’t even have the applications until tonight. They had to shut down at 8:30 rather than 9 as was announced… GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR. But it gets worse. Bill Storm has appointed himself master of the Task Force, claiming that the PUC established the Task Force, that they ordered that he preside over it… like hell… I was at the PUC meeting, they did no such thing. That’s just how Commerce things it should be done — but the people on this Task Force who were around for the Goodhue County nuclear task force know better… Oh, and did I mention there was no tape recorder? No court reporter to take minutes? HUH??? NO RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS??? OH MY!!

At that same PUC meeting last week, there was a suggestion that due to the time crunch, if the Task Force could continue as a work group after the EIS Scope was released, proposed by I believe Commissioner Pugh, but maybe Chair Boyd, and Chair Boyd specifically asked Bill Storm if MOES had any objection to a work group and he said NO, NO OBJECTION! Was this raised last night at the meeting? NO!!! And of course the public was not allowed to speak.

Last night, I raised concerns about his proposed “charge” because as stated, it did not address submission by the Task Force of a report. HOW BIZARRE!!! The PUC Commissioners tossed it around and did not order it but said very clearly “They can do one if they want.” Storm is trying to characterize it as “it’s not in the order, they can’t do it.” I don’t think so!

The whole point of all of this is Commerce’s attempts to neuter the public. Over and over and over. Why? Because once people look at these applications, they find there are problems, issues not addressed, and things that call it all into question… can’t have that now, can we?

iT’S TIME FOR A REVOLUTION. iT’S TIME FOR THE TASK FORCE TO TAKE CHARGE!!! IT’S TIME TO THOROUGHLY VET THE APPLICATION. IT’S TIME FOR THE TASK FORCE TO TAKE BACK THEIR CHAIR!!! IT’S TIME TO CALL IN THE VIDEO CREW TO HAVE A RECORD OF THIS!!! TIME TO GET TO WORK AND WRITE A REPORT!!! IT’S TIME TO ESTABLISH A WORK GROUP!!! Of course that’s just what Commerce doesn’t want to have happen.

Meanwhile, the PUC site is down down down, and I finagled this link the final Task Force charge:

Task Force Charge

I hope it works better for you than it has for me! The main Prairie Island uprate page asked for an admin name and password! Supposedly the Prehearing Order also came out, but the PUC side of things, the “Search Documents” is as bad as the Energy Facility Permitting side, nothing comes up when I search any docket…

I found the First Prehearing Order, issued October (now that the PUC site is working again):

First Prehearing Order

Bill Storm claims that there was a PUC order regarding the Task Force but it’s nowhere to be found. There’s the words and a dead link on the MOES site that now no longer requires a password!!!

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGH!

So now I talked with Janet Gonzalez who referred me to Mike Kaluzniak who sent this… it’s an “Informal Order” which says nothing new:

Commission Meeting Agenda Item #6
September 25, 2008

The above-entitled matter has been considered by the Commission and the following disposition made:

Authorized formation of an Advisory Task Force pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 216E.08 and Minn. Rules, Part 7849.5270. The structure, charge, and duration of the Advisory Task Force shall be as presented in the attached comments of the Minnesota Office of Energy Security, Energy Facility Permitting, with one exception: the composition of the Advisory Task Force shall be expanded to include a representative of the townships of Goodhue County.

The Commission agrees with and adopts the attached recommendations of the Office of Energy Security, modified as to the composition of the Advisory Task Force as set forth above.

BY ORDER OF THE COMMISSION

Let’s see, this Informal Order is just a prefunctory statement and doesn’t mention their statement that the Task force could continue if it wanted to, there’s no mention of the Task Force being able to write a report if it wanted to, which they DID say. There’s nothing that backs up Bill Storm’s statement that the PUC said he was to PRESIDE over the Task Force, which they assuredly did NOT say.

OK, fine, I’ll get a tape from the PUC…

It’s bad enough that this damn bailout bill passed, HOW DARE THEY!  But worse, they’re reporting on the wrong vote, saying that the bill passed 263-171, when it didn’t.

What on earth is wrong with reporters, papers, etc.

The vote on the Senate Amendment was 263-171. I watched that come down on the ABC life feed… folks, that’s just the House accepting the Senate Amendment to HF1424.

FOLLOWING THAT VOTE WAS THE VOTE TO SUSPEND THE RULES AND PASS BILL” AND THAT VOTE WAS UNANIMOUS LAST I SAW, WITH 300+ FOR IT AND 20 FENCE SITTERS, AND THEN ABC CUT AWAY FROM THE TALLY SCREEN.

THE VOTE FOR THIS DAMN BAILOUT WAS UNANIMOUS OR NEARLY UNANIMOUS, WHY ARE THEY REPORTING THE WRONG VOTE AND NOT REPORTING THE VOTE FOR ACTUAL PASSAGE OF THE BILL?

It seems to me too many will get credit for voting against the bill when all they did was vote against the Senate Amendment and they actually voted FOR the bill.

This is too weird…