George Santos Indictment!

May 10th, 2023

LOVE IT WHEN THIS HAPPENS! This is delightfully thorough!

Here it is:

At all times, keep the “fiduciary responsibility” mantra going — the City Council’s primary job is fiduciary responsibility for the city.

Here’s the Blue Water Farms presentation, 5/2/2023, so I guess it’s from the private invite-only meeting held last week at Smokin’ Oak:

What handouts is Blue Water Farms looking for? Shouldn’t everyone be concerned when the CEO of Blue Water Farm, Clarence Bischoff, was CEO of the Riverbend Market Cooperative, which defaulted on the Port Authority loan, and left other investors hanging in the lurch? (I’m still waiting on the Data Practices Act request, but it’s my understanding that the loan was in default, some recouped from sale of assets, and over $20,000 written off — will post when this info is received.)

What handouts from Red Wing city coffers is Blue Water Farms looking for? Who knows… the proposal isn’t public — YET. Their recent offer to “buy” the property is not public, and was rejected by the Port Authority because it didn’t meet their criteria:

It’s my belief that the Port Authority requirements for consideration of a sale were established 15 years ago, and haven’t been amended — pay particular attention to the second page. Am I missing something here, or do these requirements still apply?

What? The “offfer” is not public? The supporters, coincidentally they’re the vocals proponents of Recall City Hall (here’s the wayback of the Recall site, which has been disappeared), are claiming the City won’t make the offer public. Ummmm, hello?!?! That’s not on the City. Whether or not information is public is up to the party at issue. In this case, just like with ejected Chief Pohlman, the one with the power to disclose is the party at issue — it was Pohlman then, and he chose not to disclose.

In this case, DOH, it’s Blue Water Farms that has the power to disclose. So do it, Blue Water Farm, disclose your “offer.” Let’s make sure people know what we’re talking about. Folks aren’t talking about the handouts you want, so what else is there we need to know?

There’s a lot we need to know, and don’t have that information. It’s clear that the Recall City Hall folks loudly supporting Blue Water Farms, without knowledge of the issues and/or with select inside knowledge, apparently didn’t learn anything about confidentiality and who has the power of disclosure from the Pohlman and Recall City Hall fiasco. Earth to Mars — want disclosure? Get on Blue Water Farms to disclose!

Why is Port Authority involved? Simple… The City Council has delegated “economic development” and the vetting of proposals to the Port Authority. The current fracas involves a Blue Water “offer” for the property, made April 27, 2023, and addressed at the Port Authority meeting May 2 (the same day, probably same time, as the private Blue Water meeting at Smokin’ Oak!). Listen to the Port’s meeting:

Port Authority video:

Once more with feeling, the Port Authority findings in denial of the offer (~2:22 in video):

What does the Council have to say about these points? How is any decision by the Council possible, other than to bounce it back to the Port, or deny based on these points?

Meanwhile, the internet is full of pleadings and requests for Red Wing residents to swamp the City Council with “SELL THE PROPERTY TO BLUE WATER NOW!” This makes no sense. There’s been no information on the offer provided. So far, just presentations by Blue Water, and no vetting, no verification, NO DUE DILIGENCE.

Those pushing for this sale, who again just happen to be the Recall City Hall folks, claim that under the Charter the City has authority to buy and sell property, and yes, the Charter does authorize property sales and purchases by the Council:

What they don’t address is the Council’s delegation to the Port Authority. Even more significant, they don’t address the Port Authority process, used for the Bauer Built building, and so clearly laid out at the recent Port Authority and City Council joint workshop, and again in the Port Authority meeting (linked here again). The Council delegated authority to the Port Authority, which is doing its job — watch that Port meeting video.

One of the vocal atadvocates has even said that she had never heard of any archeological issues! Nevermind that this has been discussed ad nauseum at Port Authority and Council meetings and workshops, there’s a Memorandum of Understanding with Prairie Island Indian Community, and that a consultant has been selected to perform the work. Seems they don’t care about protection of the mounds, and that they don’t care about our relationship with Prairie Island Indian Community, and they don’t give a rodent’s rump about upholding the MOU (and to which the Port and Council have held fast). And I heard first hand at the joint Port and Council workshop the willingness of those stridently pushing for a sale NOW that they’d want it sold prior to completing of the archeological study, and would even support turning over that responsibility to the buyers, contrary to the MOU! Unreal… And again, thankfully the Port and the Council recognize the MOU.

And again, there’s also misinformation, disinformation, and/or willful ignorance of state open meeting law and disclosure regarding property sales. See Minnesota Statute 13D.05, Sub. 3:

What will the City Council do? Tune in! To join this meeting via Webex, click this link and type in the password 2023. To join via telephone, please dial (415) 655-0001. Enter access code 2551 442 7582 and password 2023 when prompted.

Willful, intentional, abdication of and failure to exercise fiduciary responsibility, failure to complete due diligence, vetting, verification…


The thing about purging files, business files, client files, which I try to do every year, is that going through, separating out the Non-Public, confidential, financial info, and whatnot, it means living through whatever it was all over again. Lots of appellate briefs, most are online now… piles of electrical studies that contrast the need claims, studies and files that no-one has anymore, and which show the lie of the upcoming transmission build-out and the one before15-20 years ago (CapX 2020 anyone??).

The rationale remains the same, sell energy to anyone anywhere, from any Point A to any Point B, whether it is coal, or whether it is wind or solar, keep us tied to central station power, pushing distributed generation out of consideration. Right now, Xcel is selling 1,500 MW “excess capacity” on the MISO market (from Xcel’s 2022 SEC 10-K filing):

Arrowhead-Weston, a Minnesota Power and ATC transmission project circa 1999, closely followed by NSP/Xcel’s SW Minnesota 345kV (PUC Docket 01-1958), leading up to the CapX 2020 transmission build-out, based on a bogus claim of 2.49% annual growth See No CapX 2020), when reality shows:

From the CapX 2020/Grid North Partners site:

The completed CapX2020 projects include:

  • Bemidji-Grand Rapids 230 kV project – Minnesota, 70 miles, completed in 2012 (view overview map)
  • Big Stone South-Brookings County 345 kV project – South Dakota, 70 miles, completed in 2017 (view overview map)
  • Brookings County-Hampton 345 kV project – Minnesota, 250 miles, completed in 2015 (view overview map)
  • Fargo-St. Cloud-Monticello 345 kV project – North Dakota, 238 miles, completed in 2015 (view overview map)
  • Hampton-Rochester-La Crosse 345/161 kV project – Minnesota, 156 miles, completed in 2016 (view overview map)

… to be followed by “CapX 2050” now “Grid North Partners.” They say, “We have no new projects planned at this time but…” take a look at MISO “Tranche 1” map:

Yes, there are MANY new large transmission projects in the works, and as we know, “it’s all connected.” See PUC Dockets CN-22-131; CN-22-416; CN-22-532; CN-22-538; etc. Perhaps they don’t want us to connect the dots, but again, “it’s all connected.”

It’s hard to remember the Arrowhead Transmission Project, though good times and bad… they built it, of course, despite their post 1998 blackout histrionic claims of “We’re going to freeze in the dark in an incubator/on a respirator, without a job,” and all the witnesses were asked, “Where were you the night of June 25, 1998? Minnesota Power/ATC made those bogus claims although the study showed that it was utility created, that the King-Eau Claire-Arpin line was overloaded, they had warning and in violation of the system standards did not reduce bulk power transfers, they had warning that the system was collapsing, and they focused on an adjacent line and not the source of the problem, so the system crashed and did it for them, separating from the Eastern Interconnect. From the report, in full below, the summary, the admission that it was system operator caused through overloading and ignoring the warnings:

And more specifically, overloading King-Eau Claire-Arpin at 1048MW when 775 was the limit:

Another summary from the report (and see also the description, starting on p. 44 of report, 54 of pdf):

Turns out something similar happened the year before:

Make that TWO somethings with the warning that was not heeded:

This “institutional history” is important to remember as we go forward, particularly as the need case was