MinnCan Pipeline
«BACK

MINNCAN UPDATE – May 2, 2008

New Address For Filing A Complaint With MPL:  

212 Second Street, Suite 100, Jordan, MN  55352

Status Of Appeal

The appeal was heard on March 13, 2008 and we are waiting for a decision.  The judges who heard the case were Judge Francis J. Connolly, Judge Randolph W. Peterson and Judge Terri J. Stoneburner.  The case was heard at the Judicial Center, 25 Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd., St. Paul, MN.

Construction Schedule

MPL asks that where an operator needs to move stakes to accommodate the movement of machinery, the stakes be replaced once operations in that part of the field have been completed.

According to the attorneys for MPL, the current construction plan is that as soon as the road load weight restrictions come off (usually sometime in mid-May), one contractor will start in Wright County and commence construction into and across McLeod and Carver Counties and into Sibley County.  At the same time, a second contractor will start in Sibley County and build into and through Scott and Dakota Counties. 

Inquiry on 1099s

The attorneys for MPL responded to our question about issuing 1099s as follows:

1.  Upon releasing Quick Take deposits, Dakota County has  made each payee submit information so that Dakota county can issue a 1099 to each of them (we do not know what, if anything, other counties have done in this regard);

2.  At this point, MPL is not planning on issuing 1099s;

3.  You might contact the counties regarding 1099s, since they are responsible for funds once MPL made its quick-take deposits.

"Will my lawn be re-seeded?"

We asked pipeline attorney John Drawz whether property owners could expect disturbed lawns to be sodded, and the following is his response:

     "In those cases where a lawn is disturbed, the lawn will be re-sodded.  In cases not involving lawns, the disturbed area will be re-seeded."

Letter Regarding Woodburning

The following is a letter from State Representative Al Doty to Larry Van Horn, Vice President of Operations at MinnCan:

Dear Mr. Van Horn:

I was recently made aware of MinnCan crews burning cleared wood.  Considering the perception of environmental carelessness already prevalent, I would like to suggest you publicize the availability of good wood available for local residents rather than burning wood for no other purpose than disposal.  I think it would do a great deal to improve your public image and encourage you to look into the possibility.  If you have any questions or if there is anything I can do for you, please feel free to let me know.

Al Doty, State Representative, District 12B

Condemnation Commissioners

The Court has appointed the commissioners for each county.  Click here to view the order

After being sworn in, the condemnation commissioners will organize a "viewing" when they will look at all of the properties being taken.  Someone from our office will try and be present at all viewings, and every landowner is welcome, but not obligated to be there.  We will advise you when the viewings occur.  Please make sure you take a lot of photos before any work is done by MPL.  After the viewing, when your appraisal has been completed, we can begin setting hearings.

September 20th Hearing

At the long scheduled hearing on September 20th, Judge Drange as expected, approved the MPL Petition for Condemnation which authorizes the condemnation actions to proceed, as well as approved the “Quick Take” process allowing the pipeline to deposit with the court the “approved appraisal” amount for each property owner. We received notice the pipeline has made those deposits and we will now move the court for an order removing those deposits from the court administrators office and sending our clients the deposit amount. If we have sent you an affidavit for that motion, please return it signed and notarized as soon as possible. We have had many questions from clients who had received offers higher that the amount being deposited for them. That meant the pipeline offered you more than the appraisal they had (but still not enough.) The deposit they make must be their appraisal amount, not the their actual offer, and there is nothing that can be done about that now. The additional amount they will have to pay after your hearing will bear interest at the judgment rate established each January by the courts. This year the rate is 5%. Interest will run from September 27th, 2007 until you are finally paid.  (Each individual landowner will have a hearing before a three member commission panel which will decide how much more MLP will have to pay.)

We received this response to requests we made for additions to the court order to be issued at the September 20th hearing.

We met with attorney John Drawz, who is handling the MPL condemnations, who asked that we meet with him, Eric Swanson, who is handling our appeal of the Certificate of Need and Routing Permit, and Kory Parkhurst the in-house attorney for MPL.  The meeting was to inform us that they are open to global settlement of the Appeal and Condemnation matters.

The Army Corp of Engineers has approved the pipeline route.  Click here to view the COE Permit and the PCA Certification Waiver.

NOTICE TO ALL OUR PIPELINE CLIENTS: At a hearing on August 30th in the Meeker County Courthouse in Litchfield, Judge Steven Drange approved MPL’s request for an order approving the right of MPL to come onto many of the pipeline landowners property to do wetland delineation as well as a survey for signs of artifacts left by American Indians or early Minnesota settlers. (Such surveys even before the quick take are permissible under Minnesota Condemnation Law. MPL is required to protect wetland and areas where such artifacts are located.) The surveys will be located approximately 100 feet on either side of the centerline of the pipeline. No stakes will be left in the ground. The final order includes additions we suggested to better protect the landowners. 

Click here to view the order

The order enjoins and prohibits any landowners from interfering with these two separate surveys. Please attempt no action which will violate this court order. Our suggestion is that you work with these surveyors to get their job done as quickly and efficiently as possible. These will not be MPL employees who do the surveys, but rather an independent consulting company. MPL will be liable for any damage your land sustains as a result of this work. You should report any damage immediately to your land agent, who has been instructed to meet with you and settle such claims and pay the damages as quickly as possible. If you and the land agent are unable to agree on the damages, let us know and that issue will be taken to the three members of the condemnation panel who will determine all your damages. 

Many of you are in the process of interviewing and hiring an appraiser to help determine the actual damages you have sustained. We have recommended that you get together and hire an appraiser for all the parcels in your area. This provides an opportunity to save appraisal money by offering one appraiser an opportunity to represent many of you. We then work with your choice of appraiser to maximize the damages to which you are entitled.

We have strongly recommended to our clients they do not consider any offer from MPL until their appraisal is done. Once that appraisal is done, we can help our clients determine an amount that appears reasonable, and if negotiations for that amount are not successful, proceed to a hearing before the three member panel.

Notice of New Proposed High Voltage Electric Transmission Line

Unfortunately, some of the landowners having property condemned by MPL have now received notice of a new proposed high voltage electric transmission line coming through or near their property. That proposal is just in the beginning of the process, and we do not expect it to affect the damages property owners receive in the MPL condemnation. This new proposed transmission line is also being done by a utility, which is the same legal category as MPL. For reasons we do not understand, the legislature, which recently updated the state condemnation laws to give more rights and benefits to landowners, exempted public utilities such as MPL and electric utilities from those new rights and benefits. Every affected property owner and every citizen who is concerned about this exemption should be contacting their State Representative and State Senator to demand to know why public utilities were exempted, and insist this exemption be removed in the coming legislative session. It’s too late to help the MPL property owners, but an immediate change in the law will insure those affected by the proposed electric utility condemnation do receive those rights and benefits. We will be monitoring this proposed new transmission line. Much better procedures than were given to pipeline landowners are already in place to give appropriate notice and opportunity to participate to transmission line landowners.

Click here for U-Can Contacts

↓07-25-07 Amended Notice of Hearings for All Counties .pdf

Rehearing of PUC’s Decision to Allow Pipeline:

On June 7, 2007, the Public Utilities Commission rejected all requests for reconsideration regarding its prior approval of both the certificate of need and routing permit of the MinnCan pipeline.  The PUC indicated it would adhere to the initial order with only a couple of minor clarifications.  We cannot appeal these decisions until the PUC makes its order final.  At this point, we have not received any indication of the timetable but anticipate that will occur fairly quickly.  Without a final order, the pipeline attorneys cannot start the condemnation process.  Once the final order is released, we are still guessing that MinnCan will start the condemnations despite the risk they have of proceeding during our appeal.  Stay tuned.

 

 

Appeal of PUC Decision to Allow Pipeline:       

Legal Challenge to the Pipeline

Many people have called to ask about our legal challenge to the pipeline. We’re delighted to tell you we have obtained the necessary writ from the Minnesota Court of Appeals which ordered the Public Utility Commission to send the entire MinnCan record to the Court for review.  We have filed our brief with the Court of Appeals, both MPL and the PUC has filed their briefs, and we have now filed our Reply Brief. That ends the written submissions to the Court.  Now we wait until the Court selects a date for our arguments. That could take six months or so depending on the Court’s schedule. Usually the Court of Appeals issues its ruling about ninety days after the arguments so stay tuned. We will post all briefs on this website. Our briefs will clearly be the better ones, in part because of the help given us by MPIRG.

09-06-07 Brief of MPL .pdf

09-07-07 Brief and Addendum of PUC.pdf

09-19-07 Relators' Reply Brief.pdf

Important Court Decisions:

 

Letters from Landowners:

We have reserved this section for letters from landowners affected by the pipeline or citizens who wish to comment on the pipeline.  We may not be able to put all of your letters on the website but we will try to put representative letters.  We do reserve the right to edit your letters or not use them if they are going to create a defamation problem for either you or us.

↓ Questions From Landowners .pdf

↓ Questions and Answers Regarding Tree Removal.pdf

 

Condemnation Pocket Guide:

 

Articles:

 

Minnesota Pipeline Contact Person for Krass Monroe Clients:

   
  »Bobby Martin
 

  Office: 952.233.3332

   
 

  Email Bobby Martinl

 
 

 

 

Attorneys:  
  » Phillip "Rod" Krass
» John "Jack" Harper
» C. John Jossart
» Molly Hamilton
   
   
Contact:  
 
» Lynn Mausolf, Paralegal
  phone 952.885.5989
spacer