Legalectric

Trump’s disdain, disregard, every imaginable dis, is embodied in the federal funding freeze, funding cuts, closing of crucial agencies, gutting the federal workforce, and we’re all going to be paying for it. The impacts are already severe, and from there, it only gets worse.

In last weekend’s bEagle:

Federal funding cuts hurt our community

Since word of the Trump administration federal funding freeze was released, I’ve been trying to nail down the impacts to Goodhue County, Red Wing, Red Wing School District and even our library.

It’s not easy. The state now has a website showing funding at risk and funding cuts: mn.gov/mmb/budget/federal-investments/data-and-reporting/ showing “Temporary Disruptions” and “Permanent Cancellations.” What’s missing is an explanation that the “power of the purse” is with Congress, and that it’s unconstitutional for the executive branch to interfere with Congressionally appropriated funds.

The impact? Withholding funding pulls the rug out from under local governments.

The state’s page lists infrastructure projects at risk by county. Look for yourself, Goodhue County projects total $56,967,740. mn.gov/mmb/budget/federal-investments/data-and-reporting/programs-projects.jsp

At the last City Council meeting, we heard of a $1.9 million grant for bulkhead rehab, but that’s federal funding at risk, as is $641,543 for “airport operations and capital projects.” Red Wing “local road/bridge projects” total $4,439,275. How to make up for this $4,439,275 investment? How many jobs are lost? Do we foot the bill, or will the projects disappear?

Our elected officials swore on oath to support the Constitution of the United States, the constitution of this state, and to discharge faithfully the duties of their office to the best of their judgment and ability. Some, however, did vote for Trump. There’s an inherent conflict when this administration’s actions are gutting our economy and damaging our local governments through unconstitutional acts. To elected officials, what does your oath of office require? Particularly those who voted for Trump, what are you doing to restore federal funding for our community? Show your work.

Carol A. Overland

Red Wing

Oh, wait, not that MISO… we should be so lucky. It’s THIS one:

And speaking of which, here’s what the LMP market is doing today — it’s usually blue, so this is nothing unusual, other than the yellow and purple rubbing shoulders at the border:

Anyway, the Certificate of Need for the Mankato-Mississippi River transmission project, a/k/a Wilmarth-North Rochester-Tremval, PUC Docket CN-22-532, is flying through permitting using the “informal” process,” which means there’s no hearing on need, just “comments.” Great… so given that, it’s comment time again — we just had to file Reply comments last Thursday:

Here are all the comments filed thus far — MISO wasn’t too happy with the Prehns & NoCapX Initial Comment, you might want to check it out, plus MISO’s Reply Comment and Prehn & NoCapX Reply Comment:

INITIAL COMMENTS

REPLY COMMENTS

From the Mankato-Mississippi River Transmission Project page… WHAT A LOAD:

Now’s the time to report “Anti-Christian” activity — you know what to do:

Report to Anti-ChristianBiasReporting@va.gov

Remember how Trump pushed a “Muslim ban,” campaigning on it starting in 2015, and Executive Orders starting immediately after inauguration in 2017?

The flip side appeared right away in Trump II: Eradicating Anti-Christian Bias EO 14202 – February 6, 2025

It’s like that false yet malignant “War on Christmas,” much more dangerous, and spreading, essentially flying in the face of separation of church and state. What is “Anti-Christian bias” anyway, and where and when are these named offenses occuring?

I guess at Dept. of Veterans Affairs, hence this email that went out?!?

Report to Anti-ChristianBiasReporting@va.gov

Those in transmission will testify that for a LONG time I’ve been saying “MISO IS NOT THE DECIDER!” And yes, I’m shouting, because the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission is abdicating their role and allowing utilities to use “MISO approval” as a demonstration of need for a transmission project.

As we say in transmission, “It’s all connected.”

Yesterday, I received word of a FERC decision and more importantly, a “Statement” of the Chair’s Concurrence about system operators and “regional plans” versus state authority:

HERE ‘TIS IF YOU DON’T FEEL LIKE SCROLLING DOWN

The decision dismissed PJM’s request for a waiver of a deadline to address costs, and FERC rejected argument for more time:

The Chair’s Concurrence is the crucial and most interesting part — which FERC did not address in dismissing the Petition. The Concurrence weighs in on filings claiming that inclusion of a project in a regional transmission plan pre-empts a state’s permitting process and power:

Granted a claim of pre-emption is a step beyond a utility offering inclusion in a regional transmission plan and a state Commission rolling over to a utilities wish…

As I’ve said repeatedly, a utilities desire is NOT need!

So let’s get local. Here’s an example of misuse of MISO “approval,” keeping in mind that MISO is a marketing organization of utilities and transmission owners. The notion of MISO “approval” is a leading characterization, found in many applications, for example, Xcel’s “Mankato-Mississippi” 345kV line now in permitting )”need” Reply Comments are due Friday). In the intro to that Mankato-Mississippi f/k/a Wilmarth – N Rochester – Tremval Application, the “Summary of Need Analysis” on page 48:

On p. 62-63, more of MISO‘s dream:

And in the section on need, “Xcel’s Need Analysis” was based on MISOs “analysis” — p. 68:

Again, it’s all about MISO and transmission buildout, despite peak demand falling, falling, falling, yet to rise to the record peak in 2006. Where’s the need? It’s all about economics, again, MISO is all about marketing – and check out the view of this transmission build-out per MISO’s Independent Monitor.

The big picture plan:

Here’s what MISO claims the benefits are, page 60 of application, the benefits accruing to MISO MEMBERS, not the public, not the ratepayers. For building transmission, MISO members get a good ROI plus they then charge for transmission services, a new revenue stream.

Here’s the short version, the Concurrence only, from FERC:

And the ENTIRE FERC Order, well worth a read: