Legalectric

As seen on Hwy. 52 between the Zumbrota exits

Goodhue County is considering modifications of their wind ordinance, and have formed a committee to look at it with county planning staff.

CLICK HERE for the County’s wind page.

And here is the draft ordinance, in pdf’d Track Changes:

Article 18 draft revision 06-14-2010

Here is the report from the Rochester Post Bulletin:

First draft of Goodhue County’s new wind regulations proves unpopular

And from June 15th Beagle:

County seeks more time on wind proposal

We were there to address specifics about proposed changes, and the discussion was wide ranging.

Ben Kerl, National Wind/AWA Goodhue (or whatever their name may be today!) made some astounding statements yesterday.  He actually said, regarding Goodhue County’s ordinance proposal for wind projects, where they proposed to require a copy of the Power Purchase Agreement, to demonstrate it’s not a vaporware project, to help assure “they wouldn’t build an empty building,” and he had the audacity to say that he objected to this requirement, and that he’d have to check with Xcel to see if it could be disclosed.  IF IT COULD BE DISCLOSED!!!

EXCUUUUUUUUSE MEEE?!?!  It’s already public information (redacted a tad-bit), it’s already a public document:

PPA – North Goodhue Wind

PPA – South Goodhue

The PPA provided in the PPA dockets would be sufficient to satisfy the county’s concerns.

That statement of Kerl’s was SO egregious I just couldn’t sit there and let it slide.

These PPAs above are from the Goodhue PPA dockets at the PUC.  To review the full PPA dockets:

1. Go to www.puc.state.mn.us; and
2. Click on “search documents;” and
3. Search for dockets 09-1348 and 09-1350 (they’re pretty much identical).

Oh, and we were discussing a Property Protection Plan as has been established in other jurisdictions, where the developer essentially guarantees that the property values will not be lower.   Steve Groth raised that issue, and of course Ben Kerl objected, and thought it essentially a black hole of liability that would quash funding.  I raised the “Buy the Farm” provision for transmission as something that is used in transmission to assure that if a landowner wants out, that they could do so.

CLICK HERE for  Minn. Stat. 216E.12 — “Buy the Farm” and go down to Subd. 4.

There’s more, but that requires a little background work, so stay tuned.  In the meantime…

Shame on you, Ben Kerl…