Legalectric

Lot of filings in preparation for the first hearing on Association of Freeborn County Landowners’ MERA suit against the PUC. At this time next week, it’s off to the races!

First, the Motions to Dismiss:

PUC Filings – Motion to Dismiss:

NSP and Plum Creek Wind Filings – Motion to Dismiss

Buffalo Ridge and Three Waters Wind Projects’ Filings – Motion to Dismiss

AFCL Response to Defendant and Defendant Intervenors Motions to Dismiss

Next, Motion for Temporary Injunction:

PUC Filings re: Injunction

NSP – Plum Creek Filings re: Injunction

Association of Freeborn County Landowners filed a Complaint with the Public Utilities Commission against Commissioner John Tuma and Chair Katie Sieben last week.

The PUC responded with this… oh my… and an Affidavit from John Tuma, he DID contact a Freeborn County Commissioner about pre-empting the township’s Ordinance and local control:

And under the statute, Minn. Stat. §216A.037, the PUC must refer it to the Office of Administrative Hearings:

The administrative law judge assigned to the ex parte complaint proceeding by the Office of Administrative Hearings shall conduct a hearing investigation and shall issue a report within 30 days after the matter is referred. If the administrative law judge determines that the report cannot be properly completed within that time period, the judge shall report that fact to the commission within the 30-day period and shall file a final report within a reasonable time thereafter, no later than 60 days after the referral to the Office of Administrative Hearings.

Minn. Stat. §216A.03

… so today, it was referred. GOOD!

Why? Well, this is about the July 16, 2020 meeting, the one where you just have to listen to the video – yeah, we’ve got the transcript, but the video just conveys so much more:

On June 10, 2020, Association of Freeborn County Landowners filed a Complaint against the Public Utilities Commission and four wind projects: Freeborn Wind, Plum Creek Wind, Buffalo Ridge Wind and Three Waters Wind:

AFCL brought this suit under MERA, the Minnesota Environmental Rights Act, which gives anyone standing to sue, and sue we did, seeking:

• A declaratory order that the state’s permitting of Large Wind Energy Conversion Projects is not in compliance with the Minnesota Environmental Policy Act;
• A declaratory order that the Public Utilities Commission has not complied, and must comply, with the mandate of Minn. Stat. §216F.05 to develop rules for environmental review of wind projects;
• An order that the Public Utilities Commission promulgate rules for wind siting and environmental review;
• A remand for additional proceedings as required by law and the Commission’s rules. 
• AFCL also seeks a temporary injunction pending these directives and actions by the Commission.  Minn. Stat. §116B.10.

All the Defendants have brought Motions to Dismiss, and today I received reams of paper with their arguments:

Filings from the PUC:

Filings from NSP & Plum Creek:

Filings from Buffalo Ridge Wind and Three Waters Wind:

++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Onward toward the Motion Hearing on September 2, 2020! Lots of reading and writing to do in response to these, and lots of writing to do for our Motion for Temporary Injunction!

Here’s the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission “deliberating” and deciding to DENY our Petition for Environmental Assessment Worksheet. What a concept, environmental review of a wind project. It’s never happened in Minnesota, and 2,500+ MW of wind sited, sans wind specific criteria and rules. DOH!! PUC has actual and constructive notice that there are noise problems with wind. Another DOH!

They’re starting construction, too early, not following procedures, and yes, starting to move ground around, and, well, not doing a great job of it. That’s a matter for another day.

Association of Freeborn County Landowners has filed its Motion for Reconsideration, and Xcel Energy has filed their response:

Someday soon the Public Utilities Commission will give Notice and have a meeting about this… if not, in 60 days, our Reconsideration will be deemed denied, and it’s off to the Appellate Court once again!