Jeff Broberg, of McGhie & Betts, is at it again, trying so hard to out do his past antics!
Thanks to Darrel Gerber and Sally Jo Sorensen for this – it is SO Broberg, who said, speaking at a meeting in Winona County:
Broberg’s time at the podium eventually caused contention, and after he was challenged to stick to the recommended two-minute time limit, he responded:
“As the applicant’s representative, I have a higher level of rights on these issues,†Broberg said.
The crowd booed.
Sounds about right, classic Broberg and perfect response.
Jeff Broberg spoke on behalf of landowner David Nisbit, one of three residents who owns land where mines have been proposed. Broberg, who represented Rochester-based development company McGhie & Betts, spoke for about 40 minutes about both the site he represents, as well as the increasing demand for mining the region’s silica sand favored in hydraulic fracturing (or “frackingâ€) operations, where pressurized sand, water and chemicals are shot into the earth to release natural gas and oil deposits.
“We mine sand safely now all throughout southeastern Minnesota in a variety of purposes, and there should be no fear of the consequences of this,†said Broberg, a former county planning commission member.
“I think that this is not a big deal, and clearly inappropriate and untimely and prejudicial to consider forgetting about this application for a year.â€
Just how many silica sand mines are operating in Winona County? Probably it’s like Goodhue County, ZERO.
Remember Krass and Broberg’s “Exhibit 89” for Oronoco Township:
Then he tries to say “OH, NOOOOO, that wasn’t really a route we proposed, we didn’t mean that…”
And worse, he then says to the Rochester Post-Bulletin, published Saturday Sept. 24:
Still, Broberg expresses guarded optimism for Oronoco Township’s chances for success — chances bolstered, he says by a bogus route alternative he introduced as a gambit at the most recent project hearing, held before an administrative law judge.
“We didn’t do that for a minute thinking that was a viable option — we knew it wasn’t,” he said. “We needed to have decision-makers really focus on Oronoco Township and really spend more time looking at the maps, so we were confident that the judge understood what our issues were. There wasn’t another subject we spent 45 minutes on in that meeting.”
There he goes again… how dare he. Judging by the language, tone and style of the Oronoco “Reply” Brief, I’m thinking he wrote a lot of it, and it was so bad, really, Xcel wrote a letter to the judge in awe of its bullshit, read it here:
… and once more with feeling, as I asked Broberg at the Rochester forum regarding the Exhibit 89 fracas, “and you didn’t get FIRED?”
I live in Winona. A year ago Winona County signed into law a new county land-use ordinance. About two years ago the City of Winona signed into law an expanded section of their land-use ordinance to better protect blufflands. I worked closely with Joe Morse, Doug Nopar, and others in Blufflands Environmental Watch and many other citizens to lobby for the most protective ordinances possible. I spent a couple of hundred hours and attended far too many meetings, including many Winona County Planning Commission Meetings, where they went over the proposed county ordinance line by line. I can tell you from first-hand observation that without Jeff on that committee, the ordinance would have been much less protective of the environment. One county commissioner in particular and many county residents did everything they could to weaken those parts of the ordinance protecting the environment. None could match Jeff’s expertise or his patient but dogged determination. Others have told me he showed the same in his leadership of the Minnesota Trout Association. I can’t speak to the accusations here, regarding CAP-X. But I see some of the same occurring now in Winona County around the issue of frac-sand mines. I have strong concerns about certain risks from frac-sand mines and have been working with citizens who feel the same. Jeff’s position is that such mines can pose great environmental risk or little, depending upon where they’re located and how they’re operated. (Is that different from a farm, a sewage treatment plant, a subdivision, or a manufacturing facility, all facilities that we depend upon?) He has explained his position and has not hesitated to describe what he sees as very serious risks. But too many of the good people I am working with reject him out of hand because he is not entirely opposed to such mining. For them, it’s black and white. He’s a bad guy and they reject him as a possible ally. Is that sensible?