Legalectric

Xcel’s cost of electricity is down.  Yet they want more money from us, 9.8% over the next 3 years, with the average residential customer’s 675 kW/hr bill to go up $11 a month.  WHAT?

Meanwhile, last year at the legislature, the biggest of the big customers got a special rate category and special lower rates.  WHAT?

The above graph is from Chuck Burdick’s testimony — after dealing with him in the Goodhue Wind case, I couldn’t resist checking out his testimony (Application, 2A2 – MYRP).

So if Xcel Energy was authorized a certain ROE, and only earned a much lesser ROE, does that mean we should make up the difference?  Also from Burdick’s testimony:

Were this “free market” the response would be that the company should contract, that there are too many cooks in that kitchen, that the capital expenses not for our use, such as this big transmission build-out, should not occur, and we should not have to pay for them.

Let’s take a look at the drivers, where they’re running short — do we want to pay for this?  From the Application 1:

The initial filing in this new rate case is there for the reading, dig in, I’m sure there’s something you’ll enjoy.

Just go HERE TO PUC’S SEARCH DOCKETS PAGE and search for PUC docket 15-826, opened today.

In the STrib today:

Xcel seeks 9.8 percent rate hike in Minnesota over three years

This has been in the news a lot lately due to the Missouri Attorney General’s release of reports that are part of a lawsuit against the owners of the landfill, Republic Services, which, the AG states has “poisoned its neighbors’ groundwater and vegetation.”  Great… just great…  What I get out of this is that the fire’s movement towards the nuclear waste is a concern, but there are already significant problems in the here and now to deal with.

Site Q on the map above is right by the Candlewood Inn hotel that I stay at during BaronFest, held at the home of a friend in Maryland Heights just south of the bottom center of this map.  Here’s Kady, settled into the hotel:

The reports released are pretty disturbing.  Here are some maps from the Westlake Landfill Tree Core Analysis – Burken/Usman showing elevated U-235 in tree core samples:

And here’s a similar map for Thorium, but note this concentration is to the north:

And from the same report, check out these carcinogens in the core samples:

And from the Field Inspection Reports – Stark, visible leachate outbreak — it’s clearly not contained:

The primary documents from the Missouri Attorney General’s site:

• West Lake Landfill Organic Pollutant Phytoforensic Assessment – Burken
• Westlake Landfill Phytoforensic Assessment using Gamma Spectroscopy – Usman
• Westlake Landfill Tree Core Analysis – Burken/Usman
• Bridgeton Sanitary Landfill Groundwater Investigation – Price/Wronkiewicz
• Subsurface Self Sustaining Reaction Incident – Sperling/Abedini
• Bridgeton Sanitary Landfill Incident – Thalhamer
• Field Inspection Reports – Stark
• Bridgeton Landfill Downwind Odor Assessment – Wright
• Feasibility Study – Groundwater Remediation – Hemmen

And the Republican-bEagle here in Red Wing published my Letter to the Editor, here it is online:

Letter: Thanks, City Council, for reconsideration

By Carol A. Overland from Red Wing on Oct 18, 2015 at 11:00 a.m.

To the Editor:

Monday evening, the Red Wing City Council decided that resolution 6873, promoted by the National Fraternal Order of Police, needed further discussion, and forwarded it to the Human Rights Commission for a public dialog and forum. The council did the right thing.

Red Wing City Council meeting last night voted to reconsider the most recent passage of Resolution 6873, which is supporting the National Fraternal Order of Police to request “[t]o expand the Federal hate crimes law to protect police…”  GOOD!  It will go to the Human Rights Commission for discussion.

It was passed that the meeting prior with almost zero discussion (except for a procedural sidebar about Resolution v. Proclamation!):

Listen to the Council’s discussion of 9/28/2015 HERE — video at 1:05 – 1:11

9B_-_Attachment_Sept 28 2015

FYI, assault of a police officer is a FELONY in Minnesota.  See Minn. Stat. 609.2231.

My concern was first raised listening to the Police Chief introducing it, when he spoke of the State Fair Black Lives Matter protest and hostile statements there, and statements in the cover sheet for resolution, that “The United States has seen an increase of hostility toward law enforcement over the past two years.” and “at a time when law enforcement is the target of criticism and violent attacks…”  … sigh… and it was a clear diversion from very pressing issues regarding police behavior and accountability.  What’s the need for this?  If a Black Lives Matter demonstration is used as basis for a resolution of this sort, if claims of “hostility” and “criticism” are the basis… no, this is a defensive maneuver, a step in the wrong direction, and shifting the focus from dealing with police abuse of power.

Phony basis?  Yup.  It’s about attacks on police officers?  Fact check!  Check out the details of officers who died on duty, search by year on the Officer Down web page.

And though 98 or 99 officers have died on duty, and 29 were indeed killed by gunfire, there is no indication of the number that would have the targeted premeditation required of a hate crime. Those are very few, and all are front page news triggering manhunts and fast arrests. The next highest category is “Automobile Accident” at 23 (not including 3 motorcycle accident and 1 aircraft accident), arguably 27 vehicular accidents. Next highest category, 16 died of heart attack on the job. Next is a tie with 5 each for 9/11 related illness and 5 struck by vehicle. This is not an unusual uptic.  The only thing unusual is that there’s a wave of public sentiment that police need to be held accountable.

In the first meeting where this came up, on the 28th, the intro part referring to the “Black Lives Matter” protest at the State Fair (also referred to by Peggy Rehder yesterday), and the written background cover sheet refers to “an increase of hostility toward law enforcement over the past two years” and “At a time when law enforcement is the target of criticism and violent attacks…” which are red warning flags that the NFOP agenda here is to uprate the hype when in fact police deaths are at lower levels, and where targeted killings are very few, and conversely, police being murdered are far fewer than the systemic pattern of police murders “over the past two years” that generates the demands for accountability and “an increase in hostility.” I’m glad they’re revisiting, since I’ve done the research and now will be able to put my thoughts together (this last week was a busy week) for the next meeting. This NFOP agenda is disturbing.  Police are trained in response, de-escalation, and use of deadly force (how, if, and when).  They’re held to a high standard, yet uncalled for and unlawful killings are rampant. Accountability is necessary, not a dodge and weave ducking of responsibility, liability, and resistance to change.

Listen to the Council’s discussion of 10/12/2015 HERE!  Video from 54 – ~115

And a few snippets (NOT a transcript!):

Lisa Bayley eloquently explained her concerns, and that the Council was to discuss specifically whether it was appropriate to take it up, and there was no discussion about it, and that must be done.  She said it should be referred to the Human Rights Commission.  And she noted that we already have laws in place, and thinks it paints a broad brush over something that’s very complicated.  It was given to us, was written for us, by an outside group, and she’d like to see us come up with something specific to our situation.  And so makes a Motion for Reconsideration.

Dean Hove seconded the Motion, with the same concerns, and thinks it should go to the Human Rights Commission.

Peggy Rehder would be opposed to having any discussion at Human Rights Commission without the Chief present at that meeting (that was resolved, would go on agenda at following meeting).  She’s looked at the Police Department facebook page, and she looked at who was commenting and “some of them were pretty interesting felons that don’t like what we’re proposing to do.”  (She knew they were felons how?  Someone with access looking them up for her?)  “The comments that I picked up, all of this stuff about piggies, and all of those kinds of things, I don’t think it was a huge deal for the National Order of Police to ask our police to do this, and for the FOP to ask the Chief to bring it forward, because I’m certainly not seeing… the people that I can identify just obviously don’t like the police, this isn’t going to change that one way or another.

Dean Hove – Supports Motion to Reconsider.  Would like to slow down and look at the last sentence at the bottom.  I don’t think anyone here doesn’t support the police… the wording on that last sentence is something that we really need to reconsider.

Peggy Rehder wants to know what sentence, Lisa Bayley wants to revisit that last sentence, the part about the hate crimes statute what it means.

Dan Munson wants to review that as well…

Peggy Rehder wants to know if it’s just that part, or if we’re going to rewrite the entire document.  I won’t support it if we’re going to go beyond that.  Wants to table that next resolution then, don’t want to not have any real positive thing, if we’re in agreement on that, then I can support it.  I’ve been amazed to see how many people are proud that we’re doing this, not bashing the police.

Dean Hove — I’ve reread it several times, we need to talk about that last sentence.

Ralph Rauterkraus – wants Human Rights Commission, and not just send it bac, but to encourage them to engage public dialog and public forums, these are issues that people feel emotional about, and I want to encourage them to speak out on that.

Roger Pohlman, Police Chief – “misperceptions” – some comments he’s seen on Facebook, wants to clarify some things.  Thought about how litigated and how much law enforcement has so much more than any other… all dictate rulings and trainings.  So many things that our department implement, that are not being considered.  Law enforcement believes that all life is valuable, and we look forward to working with all groups to help end the needless loss of life…  But I believe the end result must be that the needless killing on all groups comes to an end.

Dean Hove: That last statement is your best statement, that all killing needs to come to an end.  That is the biggest issue we have in this country as far as I’m concerned…

(Jason Sebion didn’t say a word, not unusual, but he seconded the Motion to approve it on the 28th!).

Voted unanimously to reconsider.  And at that time, they tabled a Motion (9B) to encourage our state Senator and Representatives to also lobby for “hate crime” status.

9B_-_Attachment_Oct12 2015

Here’s the full report in the Red Wing Republican bEagle:

Council pushes rewind button on resolution

By Danielle Killey Today at 8:00 a.m.

A single sentence in a resolution supporting law enforcement has brought significant attention to Red Wing and led City Council members to take a step back, calling for more discussion.

Photo – Gretchen Hoffman, Capitol Chat

John Howe has announced he’s running for Congress in Minnesota’s 2nd Congressional District.  It’s all over the web.  I’d wager a fair amount that John Howe would win the election.  The good news is that Drazkowski will not run, Dog help us if he did (though it would get him out of the MN House!). What I know about Howe is that as Mayor of Red Wing, and as our area state Senator, he stood up to Xcel Energy on its Prairie Island uprate and worked to get the full story out, and Xcel Energy did ask that the Certificate of Need be revoked/withdrawn after it was clear that there was no need for the uprate.  Howe also returns phone calls, and he’ll stop for a chat at the Farmers Market.

He was working for a bipartisan legislative environmental lobbying/caucus org of some sort, so I hope that he’ll continue with that mindset.  But given the MPR blurb below of Howe’s early campaign stop at a Red Wing Tea Party meeting, that gives me the willies, and I do hope he’s not taking that party line.  He also says he’ll put in $500k of his own money toward the campaign.  If he’s got that kind of money to throw around, and buys in to the “pay to play” notion, that’s a concern.  He’s been a moderate, sane voice, and if he continues on in that vein, he’ll win.  If not, if he goes off like Republican Presidential candidates these days, well, he’ll have trouble in this swing district.

We shall see…

Here’s the MPR article:

Howe enters race for Congress

And on Hubbard’s KSTP:

Former Sen. John Howe to Run for Congress

In the StPPP and StPPP blog:

2nd Republican announces bid to replace Rep. John Kline

Howe runs for Second District as ‘conservative’ but ‘electable’

I think that last headline pretty much sums it up for CD2!