The ongoing saga of the Fargo-St. Cloud transmission line

Filed under:Fargo-St Cloud — posted by admin on December 7, 2010 @ 10:35 pm

Here’s last Tuesday’s last minute surprise testimony that the CapX 2020 proponents filed:

Surrebuttal of Dan Kline

Surrebuttal of Peter Valberg

And upon receiving that, I fired off a letter requesting leave to file responsive testimony with exhibits, it’s only fair, they filed NEW testimony on something that they should have anticipated, and timed it so we couldn’t address it:

December 1, 2010 NoCapX, U-CAN & NoRCA Letter Requesting Leave to File Responsive Surrebuttal

Nope, on Wednesday at Paul’s Pair-A-Dice in Albany, Judge Heydinger said NO, and suggested I look at the Prehearing Order, OK, fine, so I did, and found that she’d specifically ordered that  “Any new affirmative matter that is not offered in reply to another party’s direct case will not be allowed in rebuttal testimony and exhibits.”  Hmmmmmmm… after that “NO” I let my cohorts know that I’d be filing an Objection.

… then December 2, 2010, Valberg shows up to testify at the public hearing!

… and December 3 was the deadline for objections, so of course I filed an objection with the Order for backup for my position, and of course the ALJ knew I’d asked for leave to submit testimony and that was rejected:

NoCapX 2020, U-CAN & NoRCA Objection & Motion to Strike

Then it gets really strange:

Avon Twp Response to Motion

Oh… my… you’ve got to read it — taken out little quotes just doesn’t do it.   Something tells me somebody didn’t read my initial request after the filing of that testimony to “go forward and address this issue:”

snippet

So we argued this out yesterday, and the result?  I got what I’d requested originally, leave to file the Brookings docket testimony of David Carpenter.  Why does this have to be so difficult?

Brookings Direct Testimony of David Carpenter

“Suppression” my ass…

Susquehanna-Roseland Testimony of Dr. Martin Blank



image: detail of installation by Bronwyn Lace