Fargo-St. Cloud Project Phase IV Open Houses. Summary Report

Transcription

1 Fargo-St. Cloud Project Phase IV Open Houses August 2009

2 Fargo to Monticello 345 kv Transmission Line Project Phase I Public Meetings 1. Introduction 1 Tables 2. Venues 2 3. Format 2 4. General Notification 3 5. Meeting Attendance 5 6. Public Input 5 Table 1 Table 2 Table 3 Phase IV Open House Attendance by Location Phase IV Open House Attendance by Municipality Phase IV Open House Feedback from Comment Forms Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 General Open House Layout Phase VI Open House Attendees Phase I, Phase II, Phase III and Phase IV Open House Attendees Appendices A B C Open House Comment Form Newsletter Advertisement

3 1. Introduction The following report summarizes the results of the fourth phase of open houses for the Minnesota portion of the Fargo-St. Cloud 345-kilovolt (kv) transmission line project (Project). CapX2020 hosted open houses on July and August 3, Public notification included advertisements and mailed invitations. The open houses were held at the following locations throughout the project area between the times specified below. Monday, July 27, p.m. St. Mary s School 210 N 3rd Street Breckenridge, MN Tuesday, July 28, :30 8:30 p.m. Best Western Bigwood Event Center 925 Western Avenue Fergus Falls, MN Wednesday, July 29, p.m. Broadway Ballroom th Avenue E Alexandria, MN Tuesday, July 28, a.m. 1 p.m. Barnesville Public School Old Gymnasium 302 4th Street SE Barnesville, MN Wednesday, July 29, a.m. 1 p.m. Barrett Community Center 109 Barrett Ave Barrett, MN Thursday, July 30, p.m. Melrose High School 546 5th Avenue E Melrose, MN Monday, August 3, p.m. Albany Elementary School 10 Forest Avenue Albany, MN Invitations to the fourth phase of open houses were mailed to approximately 37,000 stakeholders within the notice corridors. The purpose of the fourth phase of open houses was to: 1.

4 Present proposed routes o For the Minnesota portion, the Fargo-St. Cloud project was in the proposed routes phase. Seek feedback from attendees o Each attendee was offered and encouraged to fill out a comment form and provide feedback on the route options. Appendix A contains a copy of the comment form. This was the final phase of open houses for the Minnesota portion of the Fargo-St. Cloud project. A final phase of community outreach for the remaining portion of the Fargo-St. Cloud project in North Dakota is planned for Venues Each open house took place at a different location within the project area. To accommodate large crowds, the venues varied hotel banquet rooms, school halls, local organization buildings, etc. and were selected to offer the public multiple opportunities and dates to attend. 3. Format Each open house was interactive. Attendees arrived at each open house between specified hours, received Project information, viewed information display boards, and spoke one-on-one with CapX2020 personnel and their consultants at different stations throughout the room. This format is preferred for several reasons: the duration typically accommodates a larger audience; individuals feel more comfortable asking questions one-on-one with Project representatives; it sets the stage of expectation for future open houses, as the intended audience will continue to evolve throughout the process. An example of the general open house layout is shown in Figure 1. Please note that because the open houses were held at different locations, each meeting s layout may have varied slightly from what is depicted in the figure. Each attendee had an opportunity to collect Project informational handouts such as Project fact sheets, including on electric and magnetic fields (EMF), permitting requirements and many more. Copies of this information can be found on the Project website ( Copies of the display boards used at the open houses are available to view at the Project website ( 2

5 The following is a brief description of each open house station: Registration All attendees registered before entering the open house and received a name tag. Registration information is used for future correspondence and as an attendee record. Project background At this station, attendees gained an understanding of why the Project is necessary and how it will benefit their interests. Engineering At this station, CapX2020 engineers provided information on the transmission line components and the various types of structures that may be built Attendees viewed hands-on displays, such as a conductor section, and had an opportunity to ask specific questions about transmission lines, their operation and construction. Video viewing area Attendees viewed a video on transmission line construction, which covered the process from surveying to stringing of lines. Routing and environmental considerations Attendees were provided with a detailed description of the routing process. Map boards were used to illustrate the stepby-step routing process. Potential route alternatives were presented. Attendees had an opportunity to ask questions about the route selection process. Map station Attendees viewed detailed project maps and talked with CapX2020 representatives about their property in relationship to the proposed routes. Interactive GIS stations Two interactive Geographic Information Systems (GIS) stations provided attendees the opportunity to enter specific comments about a point, area or linear feature, as the GIS was projected onto a large screen. Attendees requested detailed aerial maps of their property or properties as they related to the project area. These maps were then printed for the attendees. Comment station Each attendee was offered and encouraged to complete a comment form at the fourth phase of open houses. Appendix A contains a copy of the comment form. 4. General Notification The following methods were used to publicize the open houses: 3

6 Newsletters informing the public of the open houses were mailed to approximately 37,000 stakeholders within the project notice corridors. Stakeholders included individuals, groups and agencies identified as having property located within the notice corridors. A copy of the newsletter can be found in Appendix B. Advertisements announcing the open houses were published in the following newspapers: Albany Stearns-Morrison Enterprise 7/21/09 Barnesville Record-Review 7/20/09 Bonanza Valley Voice, Brooten 7/16/09 Cold Spring Record 7/21/09 Fergus Falls Daily Journal 7/19/09 Herman Review 7/16/09 Melrose Beacon 7/18/09 Osakis Review 7/21/09 Sauk Centre Herald 7/21/09 St. Joseph Newsleader 7/17/09 West Douglas County Record, Evansville 7/16/09 Alexandria Echo Press 7/17/09 Belgrade Observer 7/22/09 Clearwater Tribune 7/18/09 Fargo Forum 7/17/09 Grant County Herald, Elbow Lake 7/22/09 Hoffman Tribune 7/16/09 Monticello Times 7/16/09 Pope County Tribune, Glenwood 7/20/09 St. Cloud Times 7/21/09 Wahpeton-Breckenridge Daily News 7/19/09 Wheaton Gazette 7/21/09 A copy of the advertisement can be found in Appendix C. 4

7 The Project website ( was referenced in all public information materials including the Project brochure, newsletters, fact sheets and comment form. A toll-free hotline ( ) was created for the Project and was referenced in all public information pieces including the Project brochure, newsletters and fact sheets. A representative answers calls and directs the caller s questions to a CapX2020 partner representative. A general address (fargoinfo@capx2020.com), which allows people to e- mail questions to representatives, was also created and was referenced in all public information pieces including the Project brochure, newsletters and fact sheets. 5. Meeting Attendance Registered attendance at the fourth phase of open houses totalled 439 people and included residents of the project area, local business owners, local organizations, energy sector representatives, and government agency representatives. Due to the project area s size, seven open houses were held at locations throughout the project area. A listing of the number of attendees per public meeting location and date is provided in Table 1. If an attendee was unable to attend at one meeting location, the next closest meeting offered an opportunity to attend on another day. Table 2 provides a list of all 439 attendees by municipality. The distribution of attendees by municipality throughout the project area can be seen in Figure 2. Phase IV Open Houses attendance was slightly lower than at the Phase III Open Houses in May and June The Phase IV attendee distribution was similar to Phase III, with the concentration of attendees focused around the city centers and meeting locations. Figure 3 shows the attendee distribution for Phase I, Phase II, Phase III and Phase IV of the open house process. 6. Public Input Table 3 lists attendee comments submitted during the fourth phase of open houses. This summary reflects questions and comments directed to the Project team during the meetings and those submitted on the comment forms. The summary has been prepared based on a review of 96 comment forms completed and submitted by attendees at the fourth phase of open houses. 5

8 In general, attendees were concerned about: Land use property devaluation and planned development Agricultural use power lines interfering with operations Visual impacts on natural surroundings Health effects Location of the proposed line Proximity to homes Making use of existing transmission line routes and road corridors Continuing public communication Costs Stray voltage Impacts to businesses Siting criteria Interference with TV, radio and cell phones Substation location Currently hosting a transmission line or pipeline and don t want to host anything else Impacts to the environment including lakes, wetlands, animals and vegetation Questions from comment forms were addressed by a letter, phone call or from a CapX2020 representative. The information provided on the comment forms is directly utilized in the routing process as well as the community outreach process. 6

9 Tables 7

10 Table 1 Phase IV Open House Attendance by Location Date Location Attendance July 27, 2009 Breckenridge, MN 20 July 28, 2009 Barnesville, MN 20 July 28, 2009 Fergus Falls, MN 37 July 29, 2009 Barrett, MN 49 July 29, 2009 Alexandria, MN 118 July 30, 2009 Melrose, MN 82 August 3, 2009 Albany, MN 113 Total 439 8

11 Table 2 Phase IV Open House Attendance by Municipality Municipality Attendance Albany 42 Alexandria 58 Ashby 4 Avon 8 Baker 1 Barnesville 7 Barrett 7 Brandon 1 Breckenridge 6 Burtrum 1 Campbell 2 Clearwater 1 Clitherall 1 Cold Spring 8 Collegeville 1 Dalton 3 Detroit Lakes 4 Elbow Lake 15 Elk River 1 Evansville 3 Fairmount 2 Fargo 1 Farwell 5 Fergus Falls 23 Freeport 16 Fridley 1 Garfield 6 Glenwood 4 Glyndon 2 9

12 Table 2 Phase IV Open House Attendance by Municipality Municipality Attendance Hancock 2 Herman 2 Hoffman 9 Holdingford 2 Holmes City 1 Horace 1 Kensington 11 Lowry 4 Melrose 37 Miltona 1 Moorhead 4 Norcross 1 Northfield 2 Osakis 25 Paynesville 2 Richmond 2 Rothsay 5 Sabin 4 Sartell 2 Sauk Centre 42 St. Cloud 12 St. Joseph 9 Unknown 8 Vergas 2 Villard 1 Wahpeton 5 Waite Park 5 Wendell 1 Wolverton 3 Total

13 Table 3 Phase IV Open House Feedback from Comment Forms Question/Information Comments Is there any additional information related to the potential route alternatives that we should be aware of? I farm and am most interested that you concentrate the power lines on section lines or other existing corridors such as roads and highways. It s a safety risk if you place poles in the center of fields. As these lines are primarily needed for the urban areas, routing on/along public highways corridors makes sense. We own 4 quarters of farmland south of Moorhead in sections 28, 34 and 35. We currently have a power line on the east side of SW¼ of section 28 that serves Moorhead. This line is located on the property line between the railroad and our farmland. This line is a single wood pole and is less obtrusive to our farming operations. However, we also have an Ottertail power line that is located 70 feet into our farmland in the N½ of section 34 and the NW¼ of section 35. We have farmed around these double wood poles for forty years. Ottertail paid a small one-time payment for an easement that they can still use forty years later and on into the future and make no more payments. Our costs still continue for rent, taxes, and insurance, added seed and chemicals. We lose the income on land the poles are on and around the poles where we overlap to fill in the area around the poles. We have the liability of driving past these poles. We receive no rent and no profit. Own neighbours who farm along side get to use all their land. If we had to let the transmission cross N½ sec 34 and NW¼ sec 35, it would be preferable to put all poles and lines on one set of single metal poles. This would lessen the impact on our farm. Dwelling on north side of section 35, Elmwood Township along County 63. Loss of farmland. Quarter mile north of township 63 on section line. Pipeline runs through this area not far from our home. Buse residents indicate they do not want this line across the township. On my property there is a buried gas line 60 feet south of I-94 along Ottertail County 1, which is also +/- 40 north of a wetland slew. Above the slew to the south is my building site. On the east end of my property, the pipeline is approximately

14 Table 3 Phase IV Open House Feedback from Comment Forms Question/Information Comments feet south of I-94. This narrow strip of land is farmed for hay land. Really don t want to lose any of this hay land! 1) Use the south route!!! 2) Stay on the north side of I-94 by section 9 of Buse Township of Ottertail County. There are many homes along County Road 4. I will submit a map at a later date. I am the MnDOT District 4 Utilities coordinator. I am wondering if the information viewed is available in PDF files by . Best route I-94 the whole way. This would possibly go right in my back yard! Raising a family with electrical lines running through the property does not excite me. We own a dairy in section 35, Ashly Township, Stearns County just to the south of the 1,000 foot potential route. Please be sure that we are unaffected by the transmission lines with our metal buildings. This route would be an eyesore for 66 lake shore owners on Pocket Lake, and the end of Lakeview Resort, that has been in business for 50 years. I believe it is a must that MnDOT lets the power line build within a distance of 20 feet or less from the interstate fence, which would be much better for nearly all landowners. The northern route around Melrose would be better because it would impact residential areas less. The southern route would be closer to more houses and residential and if Melrose ever grew and expanded to the south the power line would be in the way. Pertaining to the routes near Melrose, I feel the northern route would be a better option because it is further from residential areas and would have less impact on the current population and future growth of the city of Melrose. The south route through Melrose needs to be examined. Most of the city is skirted, but not the eastern most area. Please consider moving that with the section line to the east. 12

15 Table 3 Phase IV Open House Feedback from Comment Forms Question/Information Comments Please use the I-94 corridor. I don t want it in my yard. Yes, the alternative route would go right through our yard. We live on a dead end road. We farm and we have hunting land. We just built a new house and the route would be right next to it. We don t want the northern route. I am putting in a private grass airstrip that would be directly impacted, safety wise, by power lines of this height. The directions are 230 and 50, 230 would mean taking off and clearing very high power lines if they were there. The land is taken out of CRP and already laid out by Stearns County FSA. It should be operational in Transmission lines on two sides of property are unacceptable. Also, wetlands with CRP contract involved as well as danger of young children around stray voltage, which is real. No political B.S. please. Why the jog onto Island Lake Road? Run the power line along the interstate, bury in tricky areas. R-1 zoning south of Albany (five miles). The city of Albany will provide written comments on the three routes proposed and such to be forwarded to Darrin Lahr. How it will affect businesses along the route. The construction of this along an optional corridor will directly affect our business. Why not go in a straight line and impact less people. In section 17, Avon Township along 360th Street, there is 300 foot tower on the south side of the road. Island Lake Road is a narrow township road with numerous houses close to the road. It doesn t make sense to erect a huge power line along that route. Proposed southern route affects many homes close to Island Lake Road and 260th Avenue. Also, wetlands in area make this route undesirable. 13

16 Table 3 Phase IV Open House Feedback from Comment Forms Question/Information Comments Sensitivity for stray voltage for dairy farmers needs to be addressed. The potential route would cross or border my field which has drain tile every 60 feet at a cost of $ an acre. If Brockway Township incorporates into a city, will this affect the route? Next week is a hearing regarding this issue. Island Lake Road is a sensitive area just as the Avon Hills Area is. Please do not put the substation in Waite Park. 1) Cluster development in the works with approximately 15 homes for future development area of Highway 10 and 380th Street. 2) Most of the northwest corner of Albany Township going into Krain Township is in a 5,000 acre footprint that a wind company is attempting to set up a wind farm. This includes Highway 39, which is part of one of your proposed routes. 50-foot electrical service cable easement on property, also oil pipeline easement running through north to south on property, wind farm easement on total property. We would like to put an irrigation system on the proposed route. We would like the line to go south of the property so we could utilize the 80 acre field. Along the interstate we already have transmission line, fiberoptic cables, Woebegon Trail, we own land on both sides of the interstate and always already have to go through Freeport, a sixminute round trip. We have enough; it s someone else s turn. This is not a matter of not in my backyard. It s a matter of not everything in my backyard. We have a gas pipeline, county road, bike trail, numerous large fiberoptic lines, three-phase line, not to mention an interstate highway. If there is no other way, please consider putting the line on the west edge of the Freeport Industrial Park. After attending this meeting, is there any additional The only case supporting power poles in center of fields is if there is a natural entity such as a duck pond where the poles 14

17 Table 3 Phase IV Open House Feedback from Comment Forms Question/Information Comments information that you d like to receive regarding the project? could be placed. All routing plans. I believe the I-94 route would be the best. Would like updates on finalized plan of placement of power line and how close it will come to our property. Our son is buying our farm. Why not use the I-94 route? Please keep me informed on state, federal, and any route alternatives. What is the best method of hearing my voice? I have many other people in my neighbourhood that are proactive and not reactive. Please keep me informed with the ongoing process. Any and everything. What does EMF do to RFD or other frequency driven equipment on a farm? What levels are the EMF? What the final routes are. I am very concerned about the effect the EMF has on people health wise. How many studies have you done on this and who has actually done these studies? Yes, we need to know when the public hearings are. Notification of line movement. Stay on/close to existing rights-of way. The southern routes come through our yard between our home and the one our son and family are buying from us. We have developed the farm into five lost that were supposed to go on sale this fall. We were told we would only be compensated for 150-foot strip through our wooded land and by our natural environmental lake. We can t sell anything for two years because we don t know what s happening. I haven t received much. Little has been communicated. I believe the northern options will impact less people than the southern 15

18 Table 3 Phase IV Open House Feedback from Comment Forms Question/Information Comments option. Please provide any other comments you may have (continue on back if necessary). Updates on route south and north of Albany. Need to know what the proposed route will be and how we can continue to voice opinion for or against. More specific location, miss my property (10 acres). I think using the right-of-way is dangerous to people slipping in the ditch in the winter. We did not receive any answers to these questions. How will power lines affect my TV, cell phone reception? No. Concerns on housing and building setbacks, radio signal interference, stray voltage. Please keep us informed of any additional routes you could follow for us to utilize this 80-acre field. As a landowner (farming), I feel that a route along I-94 would be the least intrusive to my business. Routing along and directly over property lines would be better than offsets from the line. Our safety as farmers is important too. While not opposed to the line, please keep landowners requests in mind. Would be happy to show like respect to farms if asked. Loss of farmland I rent on north side of Elkton Township, section 31. Loss of farmland I own on north side of Elmwood Township, section 35. Do not want it out my front door. I think to follow I-94 would be the best route. Shortest and to get out where the land is less productive. Keep the structures as close to the I-94 fence as possible. The value to rural home and property impacted by this power line damage to property and trees, TV reception, health concerns, and also concerns about possible future sale of home and loss of value due to this project. I would not want this power line to go 16

19 Table 3 Phase IV Open House Feedback from Comment Forms Question/Information Comments across my property. It would destroy and impact our property greatly! If line were to run on south side of I-94, would not impact our property that much. There are no homes in blue area of map on that side of I-94. I do not want to see a power line on my property or have it 75 feet away from my house or my other out buildings. We hope you chose the southern route. Our retirement acres are in section 15 of Buse Township. I would like to see the power line constructed along the right-ofway line of I-94. We don t want any more lines by the transmission line. We want it to go along I-94. We have land by both and it would cause less farming problems if it goes by I-94. We are interested in the route of CapX. I suggest the southern (alternate) route be used as it crosses mostly open and unoccupied farmland. As opposed to following I-94 along the Park Region Geographic, which is heavily occupied, many lakes and other geographic obstacles, scenic views. Why would the southern route when it is further and more costly to utilities and consumers just because of MnDOT s attitude towards lines on their right-of-way? Makes no sense. We are concerned about health issues and property values related to the power line. Please consider southern route from Alex to Sauk Centre. Our operation is a 2,000-head dairy located on the south side corridor of I-94. Thank you for all the great information. Great explanations from Darrin Lahr. Use the interstate route. Why run these on personal and private property? Why not stay on I-94 with the least level of resistance from owners. We think the line should follow the I-94 corridor and we would 17

20 Table 3 Phase IV Open House Feedback from Comment Forms Question/Information Comments prefer to not have it right next to us. See my note. I think the poles should be right next to the interstate highway right-of-way fence, not taking more land from the farmers. I would like to see it put on the I-94 fence line. If possible it would cause the least damage to the ag community which has already dealt with the I-94 land acquisition. We would like you to consider taking the southern country route from Alexandria to Sauk Centre instead of the I-94 route. The I- 94 route will have many homes, businesses, farms, and irrigators to deal with. What do you do in the case where people are having health issues with these lines? Do you recognize the issues and actually do something or is the homeowner pretty much on their own? Our main comment is our dairy is within 150 feet of the road. I support the interstate route. I have a new house and the other route comes right through my yard and splits my land in half. It will greatly depreciate my valuation. We would like to see the interstate route; this would disrupt less wildlife and farms. We do not want these power lines through our yard. Run the line along the I-94 corridor. What s the difference, power poles versus billboard poles? It s already established, not using our ag land. Please don t run the line on the northern route. Run along I-94. I have a home which is close to the proposed route and road and would like to see this moved to County Road 10, which had homes further away from the line. We are going to begin fighting this through every available means. Follow the interstate (I-94). This area has already been scarred. 18

21 Table 3 Phase IV Open House Feedback from Comment Forms Question/Information Comments Combine corridor, interstate highway. Most direct route, most efficient in my opinion. Can t see a lot of jogging. I think they should strongly look at old railroad bed corridors. I am in breast cancer treatment and do not need power lines in my front lawn. I don t want anything interfering with my recovery. Our property (10 acres) is valued at $300,000, after line goes in our front yard our property won t be worth anything. Who is going to compensate us for the loss of value of our property? Follow the northern route through St. Wendel Township near and existing power line. The northern route passes adjacent to a residential neighbourhood in northwest St. Cloud. To my knowledge, no residents of the neighbourhood were notified. Because of the potential impact to the neighbourhood, these residents should be notified of future meetings. This time, 5 8 p.m., is milking time in the rural area. Dairy farmers who might be affected by this project are unable to attend. Environmentally, I d like to see you stay away from Bel Claire substation site (turtles in Mud Lake). For the sake of Waite Park expansion, I hope you don t run lines up County Road 137. I believe the substation would stifle the growth of the city of Waite Park. Put the substation more towards Avon, out in the middle of nowhere. I live near Mapleview Road in Farming Township, Stearns County. A 69 kv transmission currently exists along a section of Mapleview Road. I suggest if this route is chosen, the 69 kv line and new 345 kv be combined. Comments: No access to my land!! I am opposed to any deviation from I-94 corridor. We are very concerned about the line coming down County Road 4 in Lake Mary Township. Regarding proposed route through section 34, Legrand 19

22 Table 3 Phase IV Open House Feedback from Comment Forms Question/Information Comments Township, Douglas County. I own property on both sides of Highway 27. I question why a more direct route through section 34 from west to east near the center of the township, was not proposed. This change I believe would be more acceptable to affected landowners. I am very concerned about the possibility of this coming directly in my backyard. I have three boys with the youngest being almost six months. I recently moved to this area. If I would have known this, I would not have considered buying this property. This is not my idea of raising a family with this right in my back yard. Our commercial buildings are right at the edge of freeway rightof-way on north side of I-94. Your line would have to stretch over them; we have given permission for ALASD sewer to follow the freeway on our north side of I-94 so we recommend the line go along south side of freeway. The route along interstate 94 makes so much sense that I m afraid that the government and the lawyers won t route the system where it makes the most sense. We are concerned about the proposed alternative route around the east and south side of Lake Mary going down County Road 21 and County Road 4 heading to North Dakota. We live on Oriole Lane and are very much against this alternative route (as are others in the area). I am glad you re not going by our land anymore. I think you should follow the right-of-way of the freeway and not on landowners land. I like the proposed I-94 route as it makes use of existing corridor. It should be placed in the interstate ROW rather than adjacent private land as second choice immediately on the ROW line. I feel strongly that the power line should run the most direct route down the I-94 corridor. It does not make sense to jog south to the Pope/Douglas County line and up 114. I strongly oppose that alternative. Keep it on I-94 please! Keep costs down! Go straight 20

23 Table 3 Phase IV Open House Feedback from Comment Forms Question/Information Comments line down I-94! I feel that the shortest route between two main points is and straight line up I-94 would be the shortest route from point A to B. Cost wise I-94 makes much more sense. I strongly oppose the County line 114 route. Keep I-94 corridor route. The route along I-94 would be best as along 114 and no. 4 there are numerous homes and resorts close to the roads. We have a 110-acre piece of land that is parallel to the freeway and is presently part of this project. We already have a power line with a 150-foot easement and now they are talking about putting in another 150-foot easement on the south side of our land. We are presently in negotiations with a developer about our land. This is going to make a difference to them. It was sold in 2006 and the developer was going to put up 167 homes on the land. This is going to be a lot of residential homes there eventually. There will be less of an impact on our land if these lines were to be put across the freeway from us on the south side of the rest stop. There is an easement there already. We do not want this on our land. It will affect the price of our land and ruin the scenic views of any homes to be built in the future. Nobody wants to look out their window at a 100-foot steel tower. If the I-94 corridor is used, please keep it out of all Melrose city limits. Our home is within the 1,000-foot area on the east of town. There are homes and a street (12th Ave) east of us and in city limits. The rest of Melrose is skirted, please do that with the east limit also. Existing power line on north side of 440th Street. Ashley Township, section 34 (north) center pivot irrigation. Comes up township road on southern edge of section line. Please run the line along I-94. Already have billboards, why not power poles. Don t waste my farmland. Bad move, through wetland and on the edge of the lake shore. Avon Township is a developing township. Bad for environment, also disturbing wetland. Get health effects 21

24 Table 3 Phase IV Open House Feedback from Comment Forms Question/Information Comments with cattle. Why would you not follow I-94? Not only would it be cheaper, there would only be less than half as many people affected. Please do not put the substation in Waite Park. Thank you for holding this open house. It was informative. 22

25 Figures 23

26 DVD Viewing Area GIS Station 1 TV GIS Station 2 Station 5 Comments Station 4 Routing and Environmental Considerations Area Drinks / Cookies Detailed Corridor Map Area Station 3 Engineering Station 2 Project Background Station 1 Registration Desk and Name Tags "Open House" Sign General Public Meeting Layout DATE: 08/19/09 DRAWN BY: MLTeichert REVISED: 08/19/09 M:\Clients\V-X\XCL\CapX\Fargo\_ArcGIS\2009\08 \OH_Atendees\_XCL_CAPX_Fargo_OH_Layout.mxd

27 BECKER 200 CASS Fargo HUBBARD 84 6 Minnesota CLAY Detroit Lakes 87 CASS CROW WING North Dakota Minnesota Barnesville Pelican Rapids WADENA South Dakota Legend Wisconsin Phase IV Public Meeting Attendee Locations 18 Municipal Boundary RICHLAND North Dakota South Dakota 13 Wahpeton North Dakota WILKIN Fergus Falls GRANT OTTER TAIL DOUGLAS Alexandria TODD MORRISON MILLE LACS Interstate US Highway State Highway County Road / Secondary Road 27 ROBERTS GRANT Minnesota South TRAVERSE BIG STONE Dakota STEVENS 59 SWIFT POPE Sauk Centre KANDIYOHI Melrose Paynesville STEARNS MEEKER 15 Saint Cloud BENTON SHERBURNE Monticello WRIGHT 95 1:800,000 Miles Note: - Of the 439 individuals that attended the Phase IV Open Houses, 304 (69%) of the addresses were able to be geo-coded and placed on the map. - The other attendees addresses were not able to be geo-coded because of either 1) no address was provided, 2) addresses only included post office boxes or 3) addresses did not match geocoding database. PHASE IV PUBLIC MEETING ATTENDEES DATE: 08/19/09 DRAWN BY: MLTeichert REVISED: 08/19/09 M:\Clients\V-X\XCL\CapX\Fargo\_ArcGIS\2009\08 \OH_Atendees\_XCL_CAPX_Fargo_OH_IV_Attendees.mxd

28 BECKER 200 CASS HUBBARD 84 6 Fargo 75 CLAY Detroit Lakes 87 CASS CROW WING North Dakota Minnesota Wahpeton Barnesville WILKIN Pelican Rapids Fergus Falls OTTER TAIL WADENA South Dakota Legend Wisconsin Phase I Public Meeting Attendee Locations Phase II Public Meeting Attendee Locations Phase III Public Meeting Attendee Locations Phase IV Public Meeting Attendee Locations RICHLAND North Dakota South Dakota ROBERTS GRANT Minnesota South North Dakota BIG STONE Dakota Minnesota TRAVERSE GRANT STEVENS 59 SWIFT DOUGLAS Alexandria POPE 104 Sauk Centre KANDIYOHI 287 TODD Melrose 4 28 Paynesville STEARNS MEEKER MORRISON Saint Cloud 24 BENTON MILLE LACS SHERBURNE WRIGHT 95 Monticello Municipal Boundary Interstate US Highway State Highway County Road / Secondary Road 1:800,000 Miles Note: - Of the 448 individuals that attended the Phase I Open Houses, 270 (60%) of the addresses were able to be geo-coded and placed on the map. - Of the 392 individuals that attended the Phase II Open Houses, 266 (68%) of the addresses were able to be geo-coded and placed on the map. - Of the 374 individuals that attended the Phase III Open Houes, 281 (75%) of the addresses were able to be geo-coded and placed on the map. - Of the 439 individuals that attended the Phase IV Open Houses, 304 (69%) of the addresses were able to be geo-coded and placed on the map. - The other attendees addresses were not able to be geo-coded because of either 1) no address was provided, 2) addresses only included post office boxes or 3) addresses did not match geocoding database. PHASES I, II, III AND IV PUBLIC MEETING ATTENDEES DATE: 08/19/09 DRAWN BY: MLTeichert REVISED: 08/19/09 M:\Clients\V-X\XCL\CapX\Fargo\_ArcGIS\2009\08 \OH_Atendees\_XCL_CAPX_Fargo_OH_Attendees.mxd

29 Appendix A Open House Comment Form A

30 Questionnaire and Comment Form PHASE 4 PUBLIC MEETING RED RIVER TO ST. CLOUD TRANSMISSION LINE PROJECT Thank you for your interest in this Project. Please complete the appropriate sections of this form to be included on the Project mailing list and to provide any comments or questions you would like addressed. You may submit your comments in writing in the space provided below and submit them either at the workshop or by mail to the address specified on the back of this form. You can also call for additional information. I would like to be kept informed of the ongoing progress of this Project. Please include my name on the mailing list. PLEASE PRINT address (optional) Name Organization Street Address Daytime Phone No. (optional) City State Zip Code Is there any additional information related to the potential route alternatives that we should be aware of? After attending this meeting, is there any additional information that you d like to receive regarding the project? Please provide any other comments you may have (continue on back if necessary). Thank you for your time and interest in the Red River to St. Cloud Transmission Line Project Central Minnesota Municipal Power Agency Dairyland Power Cooperative Great River Energy Minnesota Power Minnkota Power Cooperative Missouri River Energy Services Otter Tail Power Company Rochester Public Utilities Southern Minnesota Municipal Power Agency Wisconsin Public Power Inc. Xcel Energy

31 Please fold in thirds, staple and affix postage. Affix Postage Red River to St. Cloud Transmission Line Project P.O. Box 9451 Minneapolis, MN

32 Appendix B Newsletter B

33 July 2009 CapX2020UPDATE CapX2020 seeks public input as it finalizes route options The CapX2020 project team has narrowed the route options for the Red River-St. Cloud project. Open houses have been scheduled to take comments and feedback about route options that will be proposed in the upcoming Minnesota Route Permit application, which will be filed in the fall. North Dakota route options will be developed in More information on the North Dakota routing process will be available later this year. The open houses will include maps that display the route options. Please stop by anytime to provide your comments on the route options. No formal presentation is scheduled. This line is one of three 345 kilovolt transmission lines proposed by CapX2020, a joint initiative of 11 transmission-owning utilities in Minnesota and the surrounding region. The initiative is designed to expand the electricity infrastructure to ensure continued reliable service, meet the growth in electricity demand and support renewable energy expansion. If you are unable to attend an open house, submit comments by visiting calling or sending at to fargoinfo@capx2020.com. Open house schedule Monday, July p.m. St. Mary s School 210 4th Street North Breckenridge, MN Tuesday, July a.m. 1 p.m. Barnesville Public School old gym 302 3rd Street SE Barnesville, MN :30 8:30 p.m. Best Western Bigwood Event Center 952 Western Avenue Fergus Falls, MN Wednesday, July a.m. 1 p.m. Barrett Community Center 109 Barrett Avenue Barrett, MN p.m. Broadway Ballroom th Avenue East Alexandria, MN Thursday, July p.m. Melrose High School 546 North 5th Avenue East Melrose, MN Monday, August p.m. Albany Elementary School 10 Forest Avenue Albany, MN PO Box 9451 Minneapolis, MN Presorted First-Class Mail U.S. Postage PAID Saint Paul, MN Permit No What s next When CapX2020 finishes its evaluation and has determined its final route options for the proposed transmission line, a Route Permit application will be submitted to the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission (MN PUC), beginning the process specified in state regulations. This includes public meetings, scoping for an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and any routing additions recommended by the public or interested parties (recommendations must be to the MN PUC within the first four months after an application has been filed), development of a citizen s advisory task force if needed, public hearings, a draft and final EIS and a Route Permit decision. The North Dakota Public Service Commission oversees similar permitting processes in that state. After a comprehensive public process, the MN PUC determines whether the Route Permit application should be granted, and if so, what route the transmission line should take. The Minnesota Office of Energy Security is also significantly involved in the process, including developing an EIS and conducting public meetings regarding the report. Central Minnesota Municipal Power Agency Dairyland Power Cooperative Great River Energy Minnesota Power Minnkota Power Cooperative Missouri River Energy Services Otter Tail Power Company Rochester Public Utilities Southern Minnesota Municipal Power Agency WPPI Energy Xcel Energy Contact information Project development manager Xcel Energy Darrin Lahr, routing lead Jerry Chezik, project manager PO Box 9451 Minneapolis, MN fargoinfo@capx2020.com

34 J u l y CapX2020 UPDATE The route options for the Red River-St. Cloud project, shown below, were developed based on information compiled from meetings with local landowners and government officials, state and federal agencies, and other interested parties. Additional feedback on the route options is welcomed at the open houses. The project team expects to file a Minnesota Route Permit application this fall. North Dakota route options will be developed in More information on the North Dakota routing process will be available later this year. Red River-St. Cloud potential route alternatives Legend Stay informed The best way to participate is to stay informed. Follow progress on the individual agency websites and on the CapX2020 website at Minnesota Public Utilities Commission (MN PUC): To view the full docket (all documents filed with the MN PUC), go to the agency s website at click on edockets & efilings on the left-hand side and then click Search Documents and search for docket To view the Monticello-St. Cloud Route Permit application, search for docket ET-2, E002/TL

35 Appendix C Advertisement C

36 ~ PUBLIC NOTICE~ CapX2020 seeks public input as they finalize route options CapX2020 is hosting open houses on the proposed Red River-St. Cloud 345 kilovolt transmission line. Project information, including maps depicting potential route options, will be displayed. Please stop by anytime to provide your comments on the route options. No formal presentation is scheduled. CapX2020 plans to file a Route Permit application for the Red River-St. Cloud transmission line project with the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission (MN PUC) in the fall. A Route Permit application for the Monticello-St. Cloud 345 kv transmission line project was filed April 8, This line is one of three 345 kv lines proposed by CapX2020, a joint initiative of 11 transmission-owning utilities in Open house schedule Monday, July p.m. St. Mary s School 210 4th Street North Breckenridge, MN Tuesday, July a.m. 1 p.m. Barnesville Public School old gym 302 3rd Street SE Barnesville, MN :30 8:30 p.m. Best Western Bigwood Event Center 952 Western Avenue Fergus Falls, MN Minnesota and the surrounding region. The initiative is designed to expand the electric grid to ensure continued reliable service, meet the growth in electricity demand and support renewable energy expansion. If you are unable to attend an open house, submit comments by visiting calling or sending an to fargoinfo@capx2020.com. For additional information on the regulatory process: Minnesota Public Utilities Commission ( Minnesota Department of Commerce ( Wednesday, July a.m. 1 p.m. Barrett Community Center 109 Barrett Avenue Barrett, MN p.m. Broadway Ballroom th Avenue East Alexandria, MN Thursday, July p.m. Melrose High School 546 North 5th Avenue East Melrose, MN Monday, August p.m. Albany Elementary School 10 Forest Avenue Albany, MN Central Minnesota Municipal Power Agency, Dairyland Power Cooperative, Great River Energy, Minnesota Power, Minnkota Power Cooperative, Missouri River Energy Services, Otter Tail Power Company, Rochester Public Utilities, Southern Minnesota Municipal Power Agency, WPPI Energy and Xcel Energy.