Eminent Domain
Eminent Domain for this plant is not limited to a dozen seasonal properties adjacent to the proposed site. Without any existing infrastructure on or near the proposed site, all natural gas lines, power transmission lines, railroad spurs and even the Scenic Highway will need to be built from scratch to service the Mesaba Coal Gasification Plant.
The vast number of property onwers who are impacted by the far-reaching effects of emiment domain granted to this project are only becoming aware of it through word-of-mouth. Are you in the route of the Mesaba power plant?
Innovative Energy Project Provisions:
As noted in section 41.8-41.10, the project "has the power of eminent domain which shall be limited
to the sites and routes approved by the environmental quality board for the project facilities.".
This is an unprecedented granting of rites to a PRIVATE corporation and its probably unconstitutional. This means that not only will the 12 property owners around Diamond and Dunning Lake be affected, but also every homeowner and property owner in the route between Northern Minnesota and the final destination of the power lines.
Listed below is a portion of a Bill dealing with modifying incentives and objectives for alternative energy development, which was approved in May 2003.
Bill Name: HF0009, Special Session 2003
http://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us/bin/bldbill.php?bill=H0009.2.html&session_year=2003&session_number=1
40.12 ARTICLE 4
40.13 INNOVATIVE ENERGY PROJECT
40.14 Section 1. [INNOVATIVE ENERGY PROJECT.]
40.15 Subdivision 1. [DEFINITION.] For the purposes of this
40.16 section, the term "innovative energy project" means a proposed
40.17 energy generation facility or group of facilities which may be
40.18 located on up to three sites:
40.19 (1) that makes use of an innovative generation technology
40.20 utilizing coal as a primary fuel in a highly efficient
40.21 combined-cycle configuration with significantly reduced sulfur
40.22 dioxide, nitrogen oxide, particulate, and mercury emissions from
40.23 those of traditional technologies;
40.24 (2) that the project developer or owner certifies is a
40.25 project capable of offering a long-term supply contract at a
40.26 hedged, predictable cost; and
40.27 (3) that is designated by the commissioner of the iron
40.28 range resources and rehabilitation board as a project that is
40.29 located in the taconite tax relief area on a site that has
40.30 substantial real property with adequate infrastructure to
40.31 support new or expanded development and that has received prior
40.32 financial and other support from the board.
40.33 Subd. 2. [REGULATORY INCENTIVES.] (a) An innovative energy
40.34 project:
40.35 (1) is exempted from the requirements for a certificate of
40.36 need under Minnesota Statutes, section 216B.243, for the
41.1 generation facilities, and transmission infrastructure
41.2 associated with the generation facilities, but is subject to all
41.3 applicable environmental review and permitting procedures of
41.4 Minnesota Statutes, sections 116C.51 to 116C.69;
41.5 (2) once permitted and constructed, is eligible to increase
41.6 the capacity of the associated transmission facilities without
41.7 additional state review upon filing notice with the commission;
41.8 (3) has the power of eminent domain, which shall be limited
41.9 to the sites and routes approved by the environmental quality
41.10 board for the project facilities. The project shall be
41.11 considered a utility as defined in Minnesota Statutes, section
41.12 116C.52, subdivision 10, for the limited purpose of Minnesota
41.13 Statutes, section 116C.63. The project shall report any intent
41.14 to exercise eminent domain authority to the board;
41.15 (4) shall qualify as a "clean energy technology" as defined
41.16 in section 216B.1693;
41.17 (5) shall, prior to the approval by the commission of any
41.18 arrangement to build or expand a fossil-fuel-fired generation
41.19 facility, or to enter into an agreement to purchase capacity or
41.20 energy from such a facility for a term exceeding five years, be
41.21 considered as a supply option for the generation facility, and
41.22 the commission shall ensure such consideration and take any
41.23 action with respect to such supply proposal that it deems to be
41.24 in the best interest of ratepayers;
41.25 (6) shall make a good faith effort to secure funding from
41.26 the United States Department of Energy and the United States
41.27 Department of Agriculture to conduct a demonstration project at
41.28 the facility for either geologic or terrestrial carbon
41.29 sequestration projects to achieve reductions in facility
41.30 emissions or carbon dioxide;
41.31 (7) shall be entitled to enter into a contract with a
41.32 public utility that owns a nuclear generation facility in the
41.33 state to provide 450 megawatts of baseload capacity and energy
41.34 under a long-term contract, subject to the approval of the terms
41.35 and conditions of the contract by the commission. The
41.36 commission may approve, disapprove, amend, or modify the
42.1 contract in making its public interest determination, taking
42.2 into consideration the project's economic development benefits
42.3 to the state; the use of abundant domestic fuel sources; the
42.4 stability of the price of the output from the project; the
42.5 project's potential to contribute to a transition to hydrogen as
42.6 a fuel resource; and the emission reductions achieved compared
42.7 to other solid fuel baseload technologies; and
42.8 (8) shall be eligible for a grant from the renewable
42.9 development account, subject to the approval of the entity
42.10 administering that account, of $2,000,000 a year for five years
42.11 for development and engineering costs, including those costs
42.12 related to mercury removal technology; thermal efficiency
42.13 optimization and emission minimization; environmental impact
42.14 statement preparation and licensing; development of hydrogen
42.15 production capabilities; and fuel cell development and
42.16 utilization.
42.17 (b) This subdivision does not apply to nor affect a
42.18 proposal to add utility-owned resources that is pending on the
42.19 date of enactment of this act before the public utilities
42.20 commission or to competitive bid solicitations to provide
42.21 capacity or energy that is scheduled to be online by December
42.22 31, 2006.
42.23 Sec. 2. [EFFECTIVE DATE.]
42.24 This article is effective the day following final enactment.
Articles:
Gas pipeline issue reviewed for Minnesota Steel, Mesaba Energy
Beth Bily
Herald-Review
May 05th, 2006
Questions remain in Excelsior Energy Project
by Aaron Brown
Hibbing Daily Tribune
August 21, 2005
Mesaba Plant in Ron Gustafson's back yard
by Carol Overland
July 4, 2005
America's Voice is Being Heard
Castle Coalition
Legal Documents:
City of Richfield HRA vs. Walser Auto Sales, Inc.
STATE OF MINNESOTA
IN COURT OF APPEALS
Filed April 18, 2002
Business Relocation Claims by Walser Auto Sales, Inc.
STATE OF MINNESOTA
IN COURT OF APPEALS
Filed March 15, 2005
Affirmed
Minge, Judge
City of Richfield HRA vs. Walser Auto Sales, Inc.
STATE OF MINNESOTA
IN COURT OF APPEALS
Filed July 3, 2001
Affirmed
Harten, Judge
Walser Auto Sales vs. Best Buy co., Inc., and City of Richfield and Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
STATE OF MINNESOTA
IN COURT OF APPEALS
Filed February 5, 2002
Affirmed
Klaphake, Judge