TODAY! 6 p.m. – Dry Cask SEIS Mgt
February 16th, 2022

In-person meeting tonight — MASK UP!
READ THE DRAFT SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT AND REGISTER YOUR THOUGHTS!
Xcel still has not disclosed what cask they plan to use. They also have said they don’t need a NRC license amendment, but the Xcel testimony in the rate case says otherwise. See p. 56-58:
Be there, or be square!
Prairie Island dry cask Supplemental EIS is out
February 1st, 2022

Dept. of Commerce – EERA announces release of the Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for Xcel’s proposal to change storage casks (to what? Who knows, Xcel ain’t sayin’), and two meetings for comment.
In person meeting? MASK UP!!!

And here’s the SEIS:
Here’s the poop on comments:

Get to work, the SEIS is 132 pages, but in format-lite!
FYI, Xcel’s “plan” is linked here:
Change in Prairie Island nuclear casks?
RW Council Meeting, and Recall lawsuit in Roch PB
August 10th, 2021

Last night’s meeting was disappointing. No action on the Recall legal action. And few showed up. Not what I was expecting!
On the other hand, Mayor Wilson wanted Kent Laugen, who has been actively involved in the Recall effort, to be appointed to the Port Authority. As with his attempted appointment of Janie Farrar, another Recall proponent, that Laugen appointment motion failed for a second.
Here’s the missive I sent to the City Council yesterday:
Overland Comment on Recall Petition to City Council today
And here’s the Petition that was filed on Friday:
Frivolous Recall Lawsuit Filed
In the Rochester Post Bulletin, linked, about the Recall City Hall lawsuit:
Red Wing recall takes next big step with lawsuit
Written By: Brian Todd | 9:08 am, Aug. 10, 2021
In the petition, Greg Joseph, a Waconia, Minn.-based attorney representing the recall group, notes how the Red Wing City Charter states, “the clerical officer shall transmit it to the Council without delay and shall also officially notify the person sought to be recalled of the sufficiency of the petition and of the pending action. The Council shall, at its next meeting, by resolution provide for filing dates and other provisions necessary for the holding of a special recall election not less than 45 nor more than 60 days after such meeting.”
However, not every resident of Red Wing sees it the same way.
[Original – since corrected: The idea that the petitioners who ran the recall efforts could determine what meets the legal definition of malfeasance or nonfeasance, she said, is absurd.] [Correction, I said “voters” because that’s what they’re arguing, that the voters should decide in an election whether there’s been malfeasance or nonfeasance, so insert “voters” here — it’s fixed now.]
Council President Becky Norton agrees.
If the conduct of the council members does not constitute malfeasance or nonfeasance, Norton concluded, there is no obligation to schedule a recall election, which is why the city council was justified in its action.https://www.postbulletin.com/news/government-and-politics/7144940-Red-Wing-recall-takes-next-big-step-with-lawsuit
[Precedent? Show us! It doesn’t exist][“not directly connected to the case” but DIRECTLY connected to the Recall — see quotes in other PB articles]
Feels good in Red Wing today!
June 15th, 2021

After wading through the bullshit last night, it feels a lot better this morning in Red Wing. Watch the video, particularly Agenda Items 7, 10C, and 10D:
Red Wing City Council Meeting – June 14, 2021
In order of appearance:
- Agenda Item 7 – Terri Cook appointed to Charter Commission, no discussion, no muss, no fuss.
- Agenda Item 10C – Recall – Brown and Buss – once again, no malfeasance or non-feasance. DOH!
- Agenda Item 10D – Shared space – Mayor Wilson does not have exclusive rights to the shared space at City Hall.
There was a call to SHOW UP and support the Council, that’s the folks in white shirts, who far outnumbered the “RECALL” folks, about the same percentages as in the Presidential votes in our fair city. Overflow crowd.

In the Republican bEagle:
4 things to know about the Red Wing City Council meeting
In the Rochester Post Bulletin:
Recall committee loses another round at Red Wing city council meeting
Rules apply only to some?
May 11th, 2021

Last night, the Red Wing City Council had just one substantive item on the agenda, a request for vacation of an easement from Tom and Anne Wilder. The land in question is that graveled area with driveway and car on it, and a wider section on the parcel to the north, also owned by the Wilders:

It looks like the City did not provide mailed notice to landowners owning property within 500 feet of the Wilders’ property! In particular, I’m looking at the landowners with contiguous parcels, those at 1231 – 5th St. W and 1268 – 6th St. W. They have smaller homes and lots, valued lower, and they just might appreciate the opportunity to add that land to their parcels.
Vacation of an easement is one of those things, like “cartway” that in law school was a big snooze. Yet it’s something to consider. Back on 2019, we got notice about vacation of the easement adjacent to Daniel Sturgeon’s property here on West. I was not pleased about this when he had bought a lot for, according to the County GIS site, “under $1,000” and that he was now asking the City to give him more land. We got a notice in the mail and so I looked into it then, and spoke against it at the public hearing.
After Sturgeon got the land, he turned around and put it on the market for many, many times what he paid:

He’s had some reality orientation since and the price is now at $25,900, still many times more than what was paid:

Anyway, the Notice for the Wilders’ easement vacation request was very different from that for the Sturgeon easement vacation request. Note the “NOTE” at the bottom:

At last night’s meeting, Jay Owens stated that Notice was published in the Eagle, but that was all, and he expressly stated that there had been no contact with the adjacent landowners, in particular, the ones on the other side of the easement.
The Charter has this notice requirement — publication, but no mailing of notice requirement in the Charter:

The timing of the Wilders’ request is odd, as they asked for the city to give them this land some time in March, based on the dates in the packet:
Agenda Item 10A – City Council Packet – 5-10-2021
The hearing was scheduled by the City Council at the April 12, 2021 meeting (9P – Attachment).
As you may recall, Anne Wilder drew this RECALL CITY HALL “cartoon” that was published by the Red Wing Republican Eagle — it was published days after scheduling of the hearing was placed on the Council agenda at the “Agenda Committee” meeting:

- I used to trust their judgment… Now I’m not so sure! What will they do next?
- I worry that this is just the beginning… Are we inviting big problems to our community?
- Great job City Council. My once-peaceful neighborhood just started FIGHTING over your decision to fire the Police Chief.
- This is the kind of thing that makes people move away…
- Shouldn’t a City Council always work to build a stronger, safer & better community instead of TEARING IT APART???
Just wow…
Here’s Tom Wilder right at the top of the initial Andy Klitzke – Ward 2 RECALL CITY HALL petition:

To ask for this easement vacation from the City while at the same time principals in the “RECALL CITY HALL” effort is, well, tone deaf, ballsy, to put it mildly.
My Letter to the Editor about this:

My question to the Wilders… shouldn’t this easement vacation wait until there’s a City Council you trust? Asking for a handout now (for the nominal fee of $425) seems a bit much given you want to “RECALL CITY HALL.“