Legalectric

Minnesota’s Public Utilities Commission has opened dockets about impacts of COVID and utility recovery of costs. To look at dockets, go to PUC eDocket Search HERE and search for dockets 20-427, and for early filings in 20-425.

LISTEN TO PUC MEETING HERE – IT’S INTERESTING!

The big utilities have requested Deferred Accounting, here’s their petition, and Staff Briefing Papers with the decision options:

From Commissioner Sullivan’s memo:

5. The Commission will open a docket to request information from the regulated electric and gas utilities on the possibilities for investments that would assist in Minnesota’s economic recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic.

My thought: Broadband across rural Minnesota anyone?!?!?! THIS is needed and would do so much to provide jobs, jobs, jobs, AND bring rural Minnesota into the 21st Century. Rural Minnesota’s lack of broadband is huge factor in difficulty of remote education during this COVID mess, and the perfect project for COVID recovery!

In addition to impacts on utility revenue, COVID has an impact on utility projects, in queue, under construction, etc.. Is anyone tracking those impacts? In this PUC discussion, someone mention that in addition to lost revenue, there would be COVID related savings, i.e., fuel savings, construction cost savings, etc.

What do those project impacts look like? For example, back in February, I’d received Notice of Force Majeure regarding two solar projects, and then in March, I’d sent Data Practices Act Requests to Commerce and PUC about that, those posts here:

Solar Force Majeure in WI – Coronavirus – February 26th, 2020

Coronavirus impact on markets is HUGE – February 27th, 2020 (includes Data Practices Act Request to PUC)

Cancellation of Force Majeure – March 11th, 2020

Impact of COVID on energy projects – March 30th, 2020

Minnesota, as of this morning’s report, has had a cumulative 10,088 cases of COVID, with 534 deaths. Reopen? We’re not there yet!

There are a lot of loud demands to “REOPEN” the U.S., for reversal of the Governors’ Executive Orders declaring a “state of emergency” and closing most businesses. These loud demands are from a small minority, and have no basis in science or epidemiology, with no reference to any of the opening up procedures or plans that are out there. Even the White House criteria for reopen hasn’t been met — we have not reached peak here in Minnesota, numbers of confirmed new COVID cases are skyrocketing (again, Minnesota passed 10,000 cumulative cases today), and numbers of daily new cases are not decreasing.

These numbers are is evidence to support a more rigorous STAY HOME, protective measures, constant handwashing is easy enough, and firm enforcement of preventative measures, particularly no groups of folks from other households, and distancing and masking in public.

Here’s the screen shot of White House criteria, past peak and 14 days of decreasing new cases:

White House: Opening Up America Again

There also was a “plan” developed by the CDC that the White House is burying, and it’s not really a “plan,” it’s “Interim Guidelines” for a few types of businesses:

Minnesota’s DEED – Reopening a Business

Minnesota DEED – Can my business be open? Review the  guidance

Minnesota COVID-19 Preparedness Plan template – Word document | PDF

• Checklist guidelines for creating a COVID-19 Preparedness Plan – Word document | PDF

Wisconsin’s COVID-19 Badger Bounce Back

And here is Target’s plan for use by Target and as guidance for other businesses:

Minnesota Department of Health Guidance

University of Minnesota “Sunrise Plan”

And another, Illinois Gov. Pritzker’s “Restore Illinois” plan

And for those complaining about STAY HOME and the declared State of Emergency, “it’s taking away my rights,” here’s the Michigan decision which explains in clear terms the federal case law precedent and U.S. constitution about a Governor’s powers to protect public safety v. “rights” and “liberty.”

And Wisconsin’s “Reopen Guidelines”

Projected Delaware Phase 1 – June 1

Michigan Court of Claims Opinion and Order

FULL DISCLOSURE: I’m no fan of NY’s Gov. Cuomo.

Yesterday’s Cuomo press conference was superb, the “reopening” discussion is one that everyone needs to use as the diving board to considering “reopening.” I’m very concerned about this as I watch Minnesota’s Gov. Walz start allowing “reopening,” and even more so as I see tRump ordering that meatpacking houses open up. GAAACK! What could go wrong!?!

Even the White House criteria, its guidelines for opening up, recommend that the peak be reached and that there be 14 days of decreasing new cases. What the hell are they thinking, opening now? Reopening means that spread will increase.

Listen to this, the reopening discussion starts at 11:33, through 17:44, followed by important points about the need for federal government to WORK on bipartisan legislation:

Cuomo Press Conference – May 6, 2020

Why did estimates increase so dramatically?

Here’s the primary source for those COVID projections, first the narrative, and then the charts:

IHME COVID-19 Resources (the narrative)

COVID-19 Projections (graphs)

We are making decisions about how many will live and how many will die:

It’s a big win for Michigan’s Gov. Whitmer and her state of emergency Executive Orders. Over and over we’ve been hearing cries of “Stay Home is a violation of my constitutional rights,” “I need a haircut,” “Open golf courses” and other nonsense. On April 23, 2020, yahoos sued about that, looking for an injunction and an end to the Governor’s declaration of a state of emergency status which shut down much of the state, and last week, the decision came out DOH! No violation of constitutional rights.

This gets directly to the parts that stick in my craw, the “I need a haircut” crowd, who think that their needs are a higher priority than protection of the community. It’s all about balancing rights with the public interest:

Binding authority from the United States Supreme Court and the Michigan Supreme Court compels this Court to conclude that plaintiffs do not have a substantial likelihood of success on the merits. This is not because the rights asserted by plaintiffs are not fundamental—being forced (with some important exceptions) by the state to remain in one’s home, in turn causing many residents to be unable to work, visit elderly relatives, and to generally move about the state. But those liberty interests are, and always have been, subject to society’s interests—society being our fellow residents. They—our fellow residents—have an interest to remain unharmed by a highly communicable and deadly virus, and since the state entered the Union in 1837, it has had the broad power to act for the public health of the entire state when faced with a public crisis.

Public safety prevails. Take a few minutes, read the decision.

I’ve had too many really uncomfortable conversations trying to elicit reasons people I know support tRump, something to understand, something to explain… The responses are not coherent, but in each one, I’ve felt what I’ve interpreted as a sense of entitlement and that they’re not getting theirs, and strong unacknowledged racism and fear and hatred of immigrants (with no knowledge of how our immigration and refugee system works in this country). I’ve also been reading, reading, reading, trying to make some sense of it.

Recently, I saw an article about a study with some thoughts, and many questions posed to groups of tRump supporters, concluding with some specific beliefs held by tRump supporters and rationales for their support. This feels like it identifies the factors precisely:

From the study, the short version bottom line:

We see here that five attitudes distinguish enthusiastic Trump voters from others. Four of the eight attitudes that distinguish Trump from non-Trump voters also distinguish strong from mild Trump voters: pessimism about the economy, support for domineering leaders, Christian fundamentalism, and anti-immigrant sentiment. And the difference makes a difference: the higher the score, the greater the chance of a pro-Trump vote. But it is also striking that conservative identification and negativity toward women do not differentiate strong from mild Trump voters.
It is also striking to note that ordinary racial resentment does not appear to divide enthusiastic from milder Trump supporters. Rather, a new anti-minority scale, which we constructed from items about perceived discrimination against whites, emerges as a pivotal dividing line. Strong Trump partisans are significantly more likely than others to allege anti-white discrimination. This reflects a heightened and, in tone, embittered complaint about what they see as line-cutting. The defiant wish for a domineering and impolitic leader, which is strongest among Trump’s most fervent supporters, coalesces here with the wish for a reversal of what his base perceives as an inverted moral and racial order.

Do take a few minutes to read this. Watching these tRump supported “demonstrations” against Governors’ STAY HOME Orders has many dumbfounded, scratching heads. This study setting out the fundamental beliefs of the strongest tRump supporters will help make sense of it.

And remember this photo, Jason Lewis, inviting COVID spread. He’s running for Senate this time, having been trounced in the 2016 Minnesota 2CD elected, handed his ass on a plate, by our now Representative Angie Craig.