Legalectric

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!

WHAT!?!?!  Yes… Really… after the delightful decision from the Appellate Court requiring an Environmental Impact Statement, telling the Public Utilities Commission that an EIS must be completed before a Certificate of Need can be issue, the Applicants dropped  Petition.  Read this whale-eye inducing filing from North Dakota Pipeline Company, LLC (a/k/a Enbridge) hot off the press:

North Dakota Pipeline Company _ Petition for Rejoinder and Comment Period 20159-114150-03

Here’s the short version:

Once more with feeling, here’s the Appellate Court’s decision:

OPa150016-091415

And the bottom line:

So from this order of the Appellate Court “to complete an EIS” the Applicant now asks for the “need” docket and “routing” docket to be brought back together and to use the “Comparative Environmental Analysis” that the Appellate Court says isn’t sufficient.  Yes, that what they’re saying:

What planet is North Dakota Pipeline Company living on?  Earth to Mars!!!!!  A “CEA” is not sufficient.  MEPA requires an EIS.  The court told the Public Utilities Commission to complete an EIS.  The Court did NOT say to go ahead with a “CEA.”

Not too long ago, Lisa Agrimonti sent around notice that she had moved over to Fredrickson & Byron.  $50 says that she’ll be filing Notice of Appearance for this docket!

It’s fall, the sun is rising on the other side of the house and bluff now, and I’m not ready!  Getting out to enjoy fall as much as possible, and then Little Sadie and I are heading to St. Louis soon for BaronFest III (didn’t have one last year).  Maybe down to Arkansas to catch fall later!  This is the first BaronFest where I don’t have a German Shepherd, and I’m not sure how Little Sadie will fare.

It’s hard to feel motivated to work with all this transmission going up here in Minnesota.  Earlier in the summer, we went down through Wabasha, and south of Wabasha where CapX Hampton – La Crosse cuts across the Mississippi River to Alma, through La Crosse and checked out the Briggs Road substation, host to CapX and Badger Coulee transmission, to Cassville and Dubuque and back up further west, a tour of electric infrastructure.

Don’t they have enough?  If they’re shutting down this coal plant, why would they need transmission?  How about using that capacity… oh, right, they get that 12.38% or thereabouts for building transmission, that’s their primary revenue source these days!

Time for a break…

Until then, I can vicariously enjoy my SiL’s trek along El Camino, and transmission lines too, in Spain.  Go, Jeanne, go!!!

Yesterday, the Arkansas Delegation hit Plains & Eastern Clean Line where it counts — a line drive to the Secretary of the DOE with this letter:

AR Delegation_Moniz_Sept 14 2015

Maybe this letter should have been headed “FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT REQUEST.”  Plains & Eastern Clean Line applied under Section 1222 of the Federal Energy Policy Act of 2005.

For reference, here’s Section 1222 of Energy Policy Act 2005.

Many of the points raised were ones brought forward in testimony, public comments, and media reports of the Plains & Eastern Clean Line transmission line proposal.  Questions the AR delegation raised include basic project information and:

• transactions and costs related to participation in Section 1222;
• obvious failure to qualify because it is not in a “national interest electric transmission corridor” under Section 216(a) of the Federal Power Act;
• improper use of Federal eminent domain authority undermining states’ rights;
• that the project is outside the statutory mission of federal Power Marketing Administrations (Southwestern PMA is proposed by Plains & Eastern Clean Line as partner in its project);
• project boundaries extend beyond the statutory boundaries of Southwestern Power Administration;
• costs for this private project could be transferred to electric utilities and their customers and this possibility has not been walled off/mitigated to insulate Southwestern’s customers;
• concerns about “non-completion” assessment of costs and prevention/mitigation have not been addressed;
• Clean Line’s assertions that they will pay certain taxes to local communities have not been investigated and verified;
• use of existing federal rights-of-way and federal land;
• Clean Line’s substantially incorrect, misleading, and/or inconsistent statements, which are basis for rejection or denial of the application, have not been addressed;
• draft EIS “did not meet the expectations of an inclusive, community-driven feedback process” expected of administrative agencies, and public comment periods and involvement of landowners and stakeholders was insufficient public engagement;
• questions regarding tribal consultation; questions regarding DOE position on state’s role in siting under Section 1222;
• impacts of traversing Mississippi Flyway on waterfowl and migratory birds, together with resultant economic and recreational impacts;
• impacts on public recreation on outdoor recreation in Arkansas;
• use of non-governmental email accounts for Department deliberations regarding this project.

Like WOW!  I’m impressed — this letter is a work of art.