Thread by @aaronklemz

A PolyMet thread on the morning of the Groove on from PolyMet rally. 🧵 Or "How I Learned to Stop Worrying About Lying Liars and the Lies They Tell." (1/

I've been working on the PolyMet sulfide mine proposal since 2010. Since 2013, I've worked for organizations fighting this terrible idea. Over these years, we have delivered MANY petitions and public comments, many in the dead of winter. (2/

In March 2013, Frank Moe and his dog team delivered thousands of petition signatures opposing sulfide mining from Grand Marais to St. Paul. Ironically it was warm, so there was hardly any snow. (3/

Later in 2013 the environmental impact statement was published. That winter, @FriendsBWCAW @MCEA1974 @ConservationMN @WaterLegacy @MEPartnership @audubonsociety and more combined to generate nearly 60,000 public comments, 98% opposed to PolyMet. theuptake.org/2015/11/06/pub… (4/

These comments absolutely blasted the records for previous public participation in a DNR public comment period. Previously, the record was around 4000 comments, on the 2010 1st PolyMet draft EIS. Other than that no comment period got more than 1000 comments. (5/

The three public hearings on the EIS in January 2014 saw over 4,000 Minnesotans come out in frigid temps, culminating in a St. Paul hearing with over 2,000 attendees on a day St. Paul schools were closed because of windchill. (6/ mprnews.org/story/2014/01/…

Notice the piles of paper on the table as then-@mndnr Commissioner Tom Landwehr announced the "adequacy" of the PolyMet EIS. Crowing about the number of pages of paper in permits yesterday ("the 479 page water permit") is a staple of agency messaging. (7/

Throughout the EIS process we were consistently told by the DNR that environmental review was not an approval process, that public comments opposed to the proposal were irrelevant, that it was "not a vote" and that permitting was when real decisions would be made. (8/

Then, when DNR found the EIS "adequate" it became the opposite - the EIS shows that the mine proposal is "safe," and that permitting would inevitably follow. minnpost.com/earth-journal/… (9/

Soon after, Gov. Dayton announced his support for permitting the PolyMet proposal, calling it "a risk worth taking," which was mind-blowing if you were a person downstream who was the subject of that risk. twincities.com/2017/10/23/mar… (10/

Then we learned how our agencies, in their zeal to "finish the job" before the end of Dayton's term, rammed through the PolyMet permits - the DNR permit to mine one week before the election. Of course, the election had nothing to do with it! (11/ mprnews.org/story/2018/11/…

We further learned that in order to ram through the MPCA permits, the Dayton MPCA reached out to the Trump EPA and asked them to muzzle their own staff's concerns about the permits. Then they hid the evidence - destroying notes, deleting emails. (12/

I mean, marinate in that for a moment. It's easy to demonize the Trump EPA, but most Minnesotans don't understand that it was OUR environmental agency that initiated this. And then they lied to us. (13/

After telling a court that they never, ever asked the EPA to keep comments out of the record, a union whistleblower in the Chicago EPA office sent copies of emails from the MPCA proving MPCA was lying. (14/ minnpost.com/environment/20…

There was a lot of parsing & explaining from fmr MPCA Commissioner John Linc Stine on the stand in 2020 on this issue, bottom line was that for 1st time anybody could recall, the EPA was kept from sharing their concerns with PolyMet's water permit. (15/ duluthnewstribune.com/business/forme…

And remember - they told the public, and legislators, that they NEVER EVER told the EPA not to comment in 2019 when the scandal broke. And they thought they got away with it, and would have were it not for brave @704afge whistleblowers. (16/

So, this is a long wind up to this conclusion. Over the past 10 years, I've seen the worst of a politicized, corrupted process where political brute force was brought to bear to ram through a terrible idea. (17/

I've also witnessed incredible bravery by agency staff in MN and at EPA to expose this politicized, corrupted process, led by unionized staff in Chicago. And then watched as MPCA, which straight up lied about their efforts to silence those staff, get away with it. (18/

So I was really interested in how the Appeals Court decision would address this. And they did - while failing to provide a remedy. But read this - is THIS what you expect from your MN Pollution Control Agency? (19/

Yesterday, the MN Court of Appeals struck down yet ANOTHER PolyMet permit. So far, the Court of Appeals has reversed and/or remanded three different PolyMet permits back to the agency that issued it. (20/

Minnesotans are tired of it. We're tired of being lied to. We're tired of being gaslit. We want clean water and economic prosperity, and we should not have to choose between them. Don't believe me? moveonfrompolymet.org/poll (21/

So, as we gather again in subzero cold, to once again petition a Governor to do the right thing, to work with us to find shared prosperity that doesn't think of risk to people downstream as a "risk worth taking" remember that we are the majority of Minnesotans. (22/

The other side continues to push a narrative that this is inevitable, that opponents are "extremists," and the right wing political machine weaponizes this to generate electoral gains. (23/

Only a powerful movement can stop a well-funded, greased campaign. In a dark time, on a cold day, it's easy to be overwhelmed. But I think about the 1000s of MNans that have been with us and it brings light and warmth. (24/

We will be on the Capitol steps this afternoon to once again petition our government to do the right thing. Will @GovTimWalz listen? We hope so.

Thank you to the thousands who've been part of this work for over a decade. You show up every time. Hope to see you there at 3. End