• Skip to main content

CURE

  • About
    • Who We Are
    • How We Work
    • Board of Directors
    • Staff
    • Annual Reporting
    • Contact Us
  • What We Do
    • Carbon Pipelines MN
      • Resources
      • Sign Up to Act Against Carbon Pipelines
      • Carbon Pipeline News
      • Support Our Work
    • Climate
      • Climate News
      • Sharing Stories | Webinar Series
      • Sharing Stories | Video Shorts
    • Energy Democracy
      • Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) Information
      • REC Scorecard
      • 100% Clean Energy MN
      • Rural Electrification 2.0
      • Energy News
    • Rural Democracy Project
      • Candidate & Voter Resources
      • Voter Engagement
      • Building Democracy & Making News
      • Clean Transportation
        • Clean Cars Benefits
        • Rural Clean Cars Stories
    • Water Sustainability
      • Water News
    • Connecting with Nature
      • Read more: What we love about Minnesota
  • Get Involved
    • Take Action
    • Events
    • Sign Up for Emails
  • Media & Blog
    • CURE Blog
    • CURE Voices | YouTube Channel
    • CURE in the news
    • Policy Documents
    • On-Demand Webinars
    • Press Releases
  • Donate
    • Donate
      • Donation Form | PDF
      • Monthly Giving FAQ
      • Tributes
    • Leave Your Legacy
      • Appreciated Securities
      • Charitable Trust
      • Bequests
      • Life Insurance Gifts
      • Real Estate
  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • BlueskyBluesky Butterfly Logo
  • YouTube

Minnesota’s Rural Electric Co-ops are Waging War on Solar

February 8, 2017

 

  • H.F. 234 eliminates all member/customer protections by eliminating third party oversight of member disputes that are currently under review by the Public Utilities Commission (PUC), making co-op boards judge, jury, and jailer of co-op members.

Jim Nichols, Lincoln County Farmer and wind turbine owner, has said Rural Electric Co-ops do not fairly consider co-op member interests and members are paying the price.

Nichols is the former MN senator who authored legislation in 1978 that generally protects MN Rural Electric Co-ops from PUC oversight. He has testified in opposition to this bill and recommends more oversight of Minnesota’s co-ops, not less.

  • Rural Electric Co-ops claim that they are self-regulated through democratic control by their members.

Analysis by the Institute for Local Self-Reliance shows 70 percent of U.S. co-ops see fewer than 10 percent of their members vote in board elections. Many of them introduce barriers, including incumbent-controlled nominating committees or requirements for in-person voting. Typically, co-op boards comprise a complainant’s neighbors who have ties to others in the community – it’s a jury of peers, but not a random or unbiased one.

Lacking evidence, the assumption that co-op boards can fairly self-regulate is fundamentally flawed.

Over the years, we have talked with rural electric co-op members who have complained about their co-ops’ lack of transparency, barriers to information and board meetings, barriers to running for election to the board, the nominating vetting process and much more. In one recent case, a candidate was asked during the vetting process, “what her husband felt about her running for her co-op board.” Co-op members deserve independent oversight and likely, their own bill of rights.

  • In the end, authors on this bill want you to believe that this is a fairness bill for co-op members. It is anything but that. It is designed to marginalize members within a monopoly where members are already captive consumers. The fixed charges to members investing in solar and wind are misaligned and serve to quash future wind and solar development by co-op members across 85% of Minnesota’s landscape.

Bill authors did not consult Minnesota’s Rural Electric Cooperative Member Stakeholders. Please Vote No on H.F. 234!

Yesterday, Midwest Energy News posted an article written by John Farrell and Karlee Weinmann of the Institute for Local Self-Reliance (ILSR) regarding this legislation.  In the article they asserted,

Legislation introduced last month and working its way through the state’s House (HF234) and Senate (SF141) would put co-op boards themselves, rather than the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission (PUC), in charge of resolving customer disputes over rates and other policies. Disguised as “local control,” the measure undermines the objective role of the Commission as a mediator between cooperatives and their members.

For more information on Minnesota’s growing Solar market, click on the infographic below:

Energy News, Take Action

Peg Furshong

© 2025 CURE · 117 South 1st St, Montevideo, MN 56265 · 320-269-2984 · · Privacy Policy