---

At the end of a five-hour special meeting Jan. 13, the Chisago County Board barely re-affirmed that its appointed power plant development agreement advisory group will report to the county commissioners soon. The vote was 3-2.

The Board will receive the group's presentation/findings at the County Board meeting February 3. The power plant development agreement will be approved or rejected by the County Board at its Feb. 17 regular meeting.

Lent Township Board unanimously adopted its development agreement between the township and LS Power LLC. North Branch School Board (Jan. 14) approved its host fee agreement, spelling out estimated payments the plant will contribute to the school district in exchange for being exempted from state personal property tax. (See school board story.)

The County Board vote on the advisory group's advice on the state granting the exemption or not, came with Commissioner Mike Robinson and Chair Rick Greene opposed. They said the task force needs more time.

The hours leading up to this split vote contained details and detours.

The first agenda item was an update on the latest design decisions, given by LS Power executive Blake Wheatley. State Senator Rick Olseen and one of the two state representatives for Chisago County territory-- Rep. Jeremy Kalin-Dist. 17B --shared information with the County Board.

(Rep. Rob Eastlund-Dist. 17A around Harris and Stacy, sent a letter.  "The Sunrise River Energy Station accomplishes a very important goal of mine...reducing tax burden on homeowners." Eastlund added, "...the proposed power plant project is ultimately a win for our area, our schools but most importantly the taxpaying citizens of Chisago County.")

Some appointees to the advisory group also spoke with the county commissioners.

Additionally the commissioners heard from many, many citizens who had two minutes to express themselves for, or against the power plant and offering advice on the agreement.

Rep. Kalin probably initiated one of the longer debates when he suggested the county hold-off on adopting a development agreement until LS Power completes its permitting process for the power station.

It is Kalin's legislation that requires a "development agreement" before LS Power is granted a personal property tax exemption. The wording of this bill started everybody down this path in the first place.

The legislature mandated a "development agreement" be adopted on a super majority vote by the county "before project construction can commence." Because there's been so much angst over what the county can actually put in the agreement, Kalin said maybe the county should first see what surfaces during state permit fact-finding and then finalize an agreement.

Wheatley, however, said LS Power is not willing to risk a couple million dollars, he said, to get the electric station through a myriad of state agency permits. Lacking a county approved "rock solid" development agreement, LS Power would be hesitant to put all its eggs into a very uncertain basket, Wheatley stressed.

Rep. Kalin said he believes a provisional development agreement is possible, one that can later be mutually amended, based on what the Pollution Control Agency or Public Utilities Commission may find applicable in deeper review of this project. For instance, it is Kalin's opinion that this LS site will end up being approved at a much smaller size and generating capacity than what's been discussed.

Commissioner Mike Robinson chastised the lawmakers, saying to Kalin and Olseen, "You could have handled this in (St. Paul) but instead you pushed it down (onto us)."

Commissioner Lora Walker also said she felt like the county was being asked to roll into a development agreement issues state utility regulators are supposed to handle.

Rep. Kalin explained that there was mounting pressure last year in the state legislature for the LS project to be granted personal property tax exemption without any strings attached...no local revenue in lieu of taxes, no stipulations on road wear and tear, nothing. Kalin said he wanted the exemption legislation to "wait a year" but he added, Rep. Eastlund had language ready to move onto the House floor.

Kalin explained he put the development agreement into the exemption legislation so local concerns could be addressed. He sought a method through which questions "that needed to be asked" about this project got asked.

There's a "middle ground," Kalin continued, where state agency duties stay where they belong, but local issues are heard. He told the county commissioners, "I felt you should be able to bargain" as part of the state tax exemption requested by LS Power.

Kalin explained his intention in his House bill was for LS Power in the future to comply with conditions in the development agreement-- or the Dept. of Revenue would find it in default and pull the exemption. "If they (power plant owners) do anything outside the scope of the agreement," he continued, "they'd lose the exemption."

Kalin stressed this development agreement should be viewed as a "contract" and the county and township can put in anything they want of this project.

But, County Attorney Janet Reiter has advised the County Board otherwise.

Reiter respectfully disagreed with Kalin. The county has no legal power to require a developer to meet standards beyond the county's reach. In the case of siting a utility like a power plant, Reiter said state controls override those of a local jurisdiction.

To place conditions on LS Power within the development agreement, conditions that the state alone has control over, could make the agreement unenforceable.

Commissioner Ben Montzka commented that the Board must follow the advice of the county attorney.

The County Board will receive the advisory group's recommendation focused on if the county supports the state allowing personal property tax exemption for this project, or it does not.

---