Press "Enter" to skip to content

Legislature Determined Not to Act on Rural/Muni Electric War

While the Legislature labors under the illusion that it can practice medicine, it has no problem abdicating its role to deal with complicated issues like municipal annexation of rural electric service areas. Unable to decide which high-voltage lobbyists to zap, the Interim Committee on Electric Services in an Annexed Area happily punted the highly charged issue back to the rural electric cooperatives and municipal electric providers to negotiate. Rather than make any decisions themselves, legislators want the Public Utilities Commission to decide this conflict for them:

The compromise would involve the PUC in settling service area disputes. Senator Susan Wismer of Britton says this is probably the best deal they can come up with:

“We’ve heard a lot of big talk today about blood baths and unhappy legislators and, and puzzlement as to whether or not they even understand that there is an issue and yet, all of the other alternatives have been turned down.”

The compromise passed the committee on an eight to one vote [“Legislative Committee Working on Annexing Electric Service Territory Issues Find Compromise,” WNAX via KCCR, 2019.11.08].

The one committee member still wanting to fight is Senator Lee Schoenbeck (R-5/Watertown), who’s sticking with his municipal utility:

The nay on the final roll call came from Senator Lee Schoenbeck, a Watertown Republican. He made his position clear earlier in the meeting when he opposed another plan from [Rep. Tom] Brunner that clearly favored co-ops.

“Make no mistake — this is about taking jobs away from my community,” Schoenbeck said [Bob Mercer, “S.D. Lawmakers Sugest State Regulators Could Settle Disputes over Electricity Service Territory,” KELO-TV, 2019.11.06].

Note that Wednesday’s compromise doesn’t solve the conflict between rural coops and munis; it only puts off hard decisions, as did the creation of this interim committee last winter. The only improvement in the situation appears to be that legislators are proposing a permanent out for themselves, directing the electric lobbies’ fire at the Public Utilities Commission and keeping those powerful forces from mobilizing against any Legislative incumbents in the 2020 election.

9 Comments

  1. Porter Lansing 2019-11-11 13:01

    I control property within the Codington County territory served well by the REA that barratry attorney Schoenbeck is railing against. My research shows that, as often is the case, Lee is running long and far away from the truth.
    *REA is as friendly and efficient an organization as I’ve ever dealt with.

  2. grudznick 2019-11-11 14:20

    Mr. Lansing, I am sure that the Watertown Municipal Utilities department will take good care of your properties in the near future.

  3. Debbo 2019-11-11 16:46

    “Make no mistake — this is about taking jobs away from my community,” Schoenbeck said.

    My question, which Porter has addressed, is does Schoenbeck’s district only cover Watertown itself, no rural areas served by co-ops? Is Schoenbeck oblivious or uncaring about the effects on the rural electric utilities?

  4. Prairie farmer 2019-11-11 17:05

    I find it interesting that in talking to the mayor of one of the towns near Brookings that is partnered with Heartland that the REAs were now taking PROFITS away from them that they use to run there city and do projects that help there city! What about the REA’s that put infrastructure in to serve the people that cities did not originally want or care to serve!

    REA’s do not have the same protection as the Rural water systems when it comes to territorties which is unfortunate otherwise this would be a moot point!

  5. Cory Allen Heidelberger Post author | 2019-11-11 17:20

    Interesting comparison, PF, to the rural water systems. Please elaborate: when cities annex rural water territory, they don’t get to take over the rural water pipes?

  6. Porter Lansing 2019-11-11 18:38

    grudz … Codington is a big county and Watertown is a small town. You know. Horseshoe and Medicine Lake. Out where Deutsch hides. Where the land has potential. Schoenbeck lives at Kampeska and doesn’t depend on REA like we rural people do. Kind of an elitist.

  7. Prairie farmer 2019-11-11 18:44

    It is my understanding that rural water territories are protected by federal law but REA’s are not.

  8. Porter Lansing 2019-11-12 05:50

    Contrary to Schoenbeck’s assertion, it’s the Municipal Utilities that are hoarding “low hanging fruit” and it’s REA’s who stand to lose jobs, if this archaic method of apportionment isn’t finally updated to represent modern expansion. Eighty five years is too long for non-fiscally responsible legislation to be in effect, without tweaking.
    https://www.mykxlg.com/news/local/both-sides-of-the-municipal-versus-rural-electric-service-territory/article_b4cb94c4-b3a5-11e9-b138-87a2b0f26879.html

Comments are closed.