Connect with us

North Dakota

Senators say money at heart of whistleblower dispute was intended for Fargo center

Published

on

Senators say money at heart of whistleblower dispute was intended for Fargo center


FARGO — Members of Congress who were instrumental in establishing the federal Rural Export Center in Fargo say a $1 million boost in federal funding for rural export efforts was meant for the Fargo center.

Comments from U.S. Sens. Kevin Cramer, John Hoeven and Amy Klobuchar echo assertions made by Rural Export Center Director Heather Ranck,

who is facing an effort to remove her from her job

after she raised concerns about how the additional dollars are being spent.

Advertisement
Sen. Kevin Cramer.

File photo.

Asked if it was their understanding that the additional $1 million was intended to go to the Fargo operation, Cramer and Hoeven, both Republicans from North Dakota, were direct in their answers.

“Yes, That was the expectation,” Cramer said.

Advertisement

Hoeven said that at the time the additional money was approved, “We anticipated that the funding would go to the REC in Fargo, but the final language for the program did not limit the funding.”

Sen. John Hoeven

Sen. John Hoeven

David Samson/The Forum

A spokesperson for Klobuchar, D-Minn., said Klobuchar has been a longtime champion of rural exports and has worked productively with Ranck for a number of years.

Advertisement

After introducing the original bill creating the Rural Export Center, Klobuchar’s office pushed for higher funding levels for the center, Klobuchar’s spokesperson said, adding that at the time the additional funding was approved, only the Rural Export Center in Fargo existed.

The funding in question was approved in December 2022, when Congress voted to boost the annual funding for rural export support from $500,000 to $1.5 million.

AmyKlobuchar.jpeg

Sen. Amy Klobuchar.

File photo.

Advertisement

Ranck provided her immediate supervisor with a proposal for how the additional money could be spent, emphasizing a dozen actions based on the impact they would have on rural exporters.

Ranck maintains, however, that senior officials in the Commerce Department, which oversees the export center, redirected the $1 million to establish seven new rural centers.

The new centers have Commerce Department employees, but according to Ranck, the centers do not have the ability to provide the type of research support that the Rural Export Center in Fargo provides U.S. companies looking to find markets for their products in other countries.

Concerned about how the additional allocated dollars were being directed, in February of 2023, Ranck notified a senior manager at the Commerce Department’s International Trade Administration, saying she was concerned the agency could be in trouble if it did not follow Congressional intent regarding the $1 million.

According to Ranck, shortly after she voiced those concerns, she was summoned to a virtual meeting with senior officials with the International Trade Administration, during which Ranck said Joseph Hanley, acting deputy assistant secretary for U.S. field operations and national field director for the International Trade Administration, shouted angrily at her and told her to never bypass the normal chain of command again.

Advertisement

In April 2023 and after the virtual meeting with Hanley, Ranck filed a whistleblower complaint with the Office of Inspector General, alleging patterns of abusive treatment, harassment, retaliation, gross mismanagement and abuse of authority.

Ranck named herself as the person who brought the complaint and she named Hanley as the source of the problems.

Ranck maintains that in June 2023, Hanley made a trip to the Rural Export Center in Fargo, claiming in advance that it was a courtesy visit to catch up on what had been happening at the office.

Instead, Ranck said, Hanley arrived at the center accompanied by an attorney and an armed security guard.

Ranck said she was told she was being placed on a 30-day paid administrative leave pending the outcome of an investigation.

Advertisement

Ranck, who has been on administrative leave ever since, said she was not told the reasons for her leave until early October 2023, when she received a “notice of proposed removal,” along with accompanying materials.

She (Ranck) is a collaborator, a facilitator, and a leader. If anything, she’s guilty of being good at her job.

Sen. Kevin Cramer, R-N.D.

That same month, Ranck’s attorney, Joe Pekich, of the Pekich Law Firm PLLC, sent federal officials a written response refuting allegations made against Ranck by the Commerce Department’s International Trade Administration, which oversees the U.S. Commercial Service, the federal agency for which Ranck directly works.

Ranck said she is accused of three things: being too closely engaged with members of Congress; refusing to follow directives to promote newly created federal jobs in locations elsewhere in the country; and violating rules relating to how personally identifiable information involving people she supervised should be handled.

Advertisement

Ranck maintains there is no truth in the allegations and counters that the action to remove her is retaliation for the whistleblower complaint she filed in April 2023, a complaint that was subsequently dismissed without any negative consequences for Hanley, the official Ranck named in her complaint.

After filing a Freedom of Information Act request, Ranck said she was informed in September 2023 that the reason her complaint was dismissed was because the enabling legislation behind the $1 million in additional funding for rural export support said the money was to go toward rural export centers — plural — and not a specific export center.

After her attorney responded in writing to the notice of proposed removal she received in October, Ranck had a hearing before James Golsen, deputy director general of the International Trade Administration, the U.S. government’s primary commercial diplomacy, export and investment promotion agency.

At the time this story was published, Ranck was waiting to see how Golsen would rule on the allegations she faces.

Abuse thrives on fear and isolation. I’ve discovered how liberating truth-telling can be.

Heather Ranck, director of Fargo’s Rural Export Center

Advertisement

Ranck maintains that because the funding bill language for rural export support wound up using the word “centers” instead of “center,” the Office of Inspector General did not investigate any of the other claims contained in her complaint filed in April 2023, which alleged patterns of abusive management and continued attempts at sabotaging the Rural Export Center in Fargo.

When the International Trade Administration of the Department of Commerce was asked for comment regarding Ranck’s claims and the disciplinary action against her, a spokesman for the Department of Commerce said the ITA does not comment on personnel matters and added that the allegations in the complaint Ranck filed were investigated and found to be unsubstantiated.

Hoeven said when the North Dakota District Export Council, an organization of experienced export volunteers, notified his office that Ranck had been placed on administrative leave, he and Cramer contacted the Department of Commerce, as well as Marisa Lago, the undersecretary of commerce for the International Trade Administration, for an explanation regarding the issue.

Hoeven said the Department of Commerce would not provide any details, as it involved a personnel issue, but Hoeven said he and Cramer are continuing to work to bring Commerce Department officials to North Dakota to meet with District Export Council members intent on expressing their concerns about the issue.

Advertisement

“We’ve worked with Heather over many years and believe she has always been very professional and done a great job. We have made clear to Commerce that they need to treat Heather fairly and resolve this issue transparently,” Hoeven said.

Cramer went further, stating: “A good public servant is supposed to work closely with other public servants like the mayors, county commissioners, governors, departments of state, chambers of commerce, and Congressional delegations. She (Ranck) is a collaborator, a facilitator, and a leader. If anything, she’s guilty of being good at her job.”

Cramer added that one of the advantages of living in the Midwest is that people know each other and work in a collaborative manner.

“She (Ranck) would be derelict in her duties if she didn’t work with Congressional offices to help advance the agency’s mission on behalf of our workers and businesses. It’s what I would expect and what she always delivers. She’s a great public servant, and it’s a shame for her to be in this situation,” Cramer said.

In late December, Jay Schuler, current chairman of the North Dakota District Export Council, which also serves a portion of northwest Minnesota, sent a letter supporting Ranck to a number of federal officials, including Lago and Golsen.

Advertisement

More than two dozen individuals with connections to area companies and trade organizations endorsed the letter of support, including Thomas Shorma, former chairman of the North Dakota District Export Council and a long-standing member of the North Dakota Trade Office.

101620.B.FF.EXIM.03.jpg

Thomas Shorma, Doug Goehring, Sen. Kevin Cramer, Kimberly Reed, Sen. John Hoeven, Kirt Gallatin and John Harju participate in the EXIM Trade Finance Town Hall on Wednesday, Oct. 14, 2020 at the Sanctuary Events Center in downtown Fargo. David Samson / The Forum

Shorma said many past and current members of the North Dakota District Export Council are on record as stating they will resign their positions and cut their connection with the organization if Ranck is removed from her position.

Advertisement

In early January, Schuler sent a letter to Michael Horowitz, inspector general of the United States, asking him to look into the matter and to put Ranck back to work as director of the Rural Export Center.

Ranck said she has received an overwhelming amount of support, including phone calls and emails, following

The Forum’s publication of a story detailing her administrative leave and the whistleblower complaint she filed

before the disciplinary action was launched.

Ranck said more than 200 people have reached out to her to express disbelief and outrage, including 40 current or past employees of the Commerce Department who told her they went through something akin to what she is experiencing.

Advertisement

“Abuse thrives on fear and isolation. I’ve discovered how liberating truth-telling can be,” Ranck said.





Source link

North Dakota

Greenpeace seeks new trial, claiming jury pool biased in case over Dakota Access Pipeline

Published

on


Greenpeace has asked for a second trial after a judge entered a $345 million judgment against the organization in a landmark case brought by the developer of the Dakota Access Pipeline.

The case “threatens to result in one of the largest miscarriages of justice in North Dakota’s history,” attorneys for the environmental group wrote in a brief filed last week.

After a three-week trial roughly a year ago, a Morton County jury directed Greenpeace to pay Energy Transfer about $667 million, finding the environmental group at fault for inciting illegal acts against the company during anti-pipeline protests in North Dakota in 2016 and 2017 and for publishing false statements that harmed Energy Transfer’s reputation.

Greenpeace denies Energy Transfer’s claims and maintains that it brought the lawsuit to hurt the environmental movement.

Advertisement

Southwest Judicial District Judge James Gion in October slashed the jury’s award to $345 million, though he didn’t finalize the award until late February.

Greenpeace is now taking steps to fight the judgment, which includes its motion for a new trial.

The environmental group’s reasons for the request include claims that the jury instructions and verdict form contained errors, and that Energy Transfer was allowed to present unfair and irrelevant evidence to jurors. The group also alleges the jury pool was biased.

Greenpeace says the jury’s award assumes that Greenpeace was entirely responsible for any injury Energy Transfer sustained related to the protests. Jurors were not given the opportunity to consider whether Greenpeace was only at fault for a portion of the damages, the organization wrote in its brief.

Attorneys for Greenpeace also referenced the mailers and other media circulated to Mandan and Bismarck residents before the trial that contained anti-Dakota Access Pipeline protest and pro-energy industry content.

Advertisement

The environmental group seeks a new trial in Cass County, arguing in part that the jury pool in the Fargo area would be more fair because its residents did not directly experience the Dakota Access Pipeline protests and because the local economy is less dependent on the energy industry.

If Greenpeace’s request for a new trial is denied, it plans to appeal the case to the North Dakota Supreme Court, the organization has said.

Greenpeace previously asked for the trial to be moved from Morton County to Cass County in early 2025, which Gion and the North Dakota Supreme Court denied.

The lawsuit is against three separate Greenpeace organizations — Greenpeace USA, Greenpeace International and Greenpeace Fund.

Energy Transfer as of Wednesday morning had not submitted a response to Greenpeace’s motion for a new trial. Previously, the company has defended the jury’s verdict and disputed Greenpeace’s claims that the court proceedings were not fair.

Advertisement

Energy Transfer has indicated it may appeal Gion’s decision to reduce the award to $345 million.

Greenpeace will not have to pay any of the $345 million judgment for at least a couple of months, Gion ruled Tuesday.

Court documents indicate that the organization could have to pay a bond of up to $25 million while appeals proceed, though the environmental group has asked the judge to waive or reduce this amount. Gion has not decided on this motion.

He noted that obtaining such a large bond will be challenging.

“The magnitude of this matter defies simple decisions,” Gion wrote.

Advertisement

Energy Transfer in court filings urged the judge to require Greenpeace to post the full $25 million.

Any bond money Greenpeace provides would be held by a third party while the appeals proceed, according to Greenpeace USA.

Greenpeace International has filed a separate lawsuit in the Netherlands that accuses Energy Transfer of weaponizing the U.S. legal system against the environmental group. Energy Transfer asked Gion to order that the overseas suit be paused while the North Dakota case is still active, which Gion denied. The company appealed his ruling to the North Dakota Supreme Court, which has yet to make a decision on the matter.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

North Dakota

Minnkota Says Cost of Data Center Power Project Rises Won’t Affect Customers

Published

on

Minnkota Says Cost of Data Center Power Project Rises Won’t Affect Customers


(Photo by Jeff Beach/North Dakota Monitor)

 

(North Dakota Monitor) – The cost of the power line and substation needed by a data center north of Fargo has risen from $75 million to $110 million, but developers say the data center company will still cover the entire cost of the project.

Applied Digital needs the project to power its data center being built between Fargo and Harwood. The data center requires 280 megawatts of power at peak demand.

Advertisement

Applied Digital will pay for the project but it will be owned by Grand Forks based, Minnkota Power Cooperative.

The North Dakota Public Service Commission held a hearing in Fargo on what is known as the Agassiz Transmission Line and Substation.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

North Dakota

Greenpeace seeks new trial in $345M Dakota Access Pipeline lawsuit

Published

on

Greenpeace seeks new trial in 5M Dakota Access Pipeline lawsuit


play

Advertisement
  • Greenpeace is asking for a new trial after a judge entered a $345 million judgment in a lawsuit brought by the developer of the Dakota Access Pipeline.
  • A jury found the environmental group at fault for inciting illegal acts against Energy Transfer during protests in North Dakota in 2016 and 2017.
  • Greenpeace claims there were errors in the jury instructions and verdict form, and that Energy Transfer presented unfair and irrelevant evidence, among other things.

Greenpeace has asked for a second trial after a judge entered a $345 million judgment against the organization in a landmark case brought by the developer of the Dakota Access Pipeline.

The case “threatens to result in one of the largest miscarriages of justice in North Dakota’s history,” attorneys for the environmental group wrote in a brief filed last week.

After a three-week trial roughly a year ago, a Morton County jury directed Greenpeace to pay Energy Transfer about $667 million, finding the environmental group at fault for inciting illegal acts against the company during anti-pipeline protests in North Dakota in 2016 and 2017 and for publishing false statements that harmed Energy Transfer’s reputation. 

Greenpeace denies Energy Transfer’s claims and maintains that it brought the lawsuit to hurt the environmental movement.

Southwest Judicial District Judge James Gion in October slashed the jury’s award to $345 million, though he didn’t finalize the award until late February.

Advertisement

Greenpeace is now taking steps to fight the judgment, which includes its motion for a new trial.

The environmental group’s reasons for the request include claims that the jury instructions and verdict form contained errors, and that Energy Transfer was allowed to present unfair and  irrelevant evidence to jurors. The group also alleges the jury pool was biased.

Greenpeace says the jury’s award assumes that Greenpeace was entirely responsible for any injury Energy Transfer sustained related to the protests. Jurors were not given the opportunity to consider whether Greenpeace was only at fault for a portion of the damages, the organization wrote in its brief.

Advertisement

Attorneys for Greenpeace also referenced the mailers and other media circulated to Mandan and Bismarck residents before the trial that contained anti-Dakota Access Pipeline protest and pro-energy industry content. 

The environmental group seeks a new trial in Cass County, arguing in part that the jury pool in the Fargo area would be more fair because its residents did not directly experience the Dakota Access Pipeline protests and because the local economy is less dependent on the energy industry.

If Greenpeace’s request for a new trial is denied, it plans to appeal the case to the North Dakota Supreme Court, the organization has said.

Advertisement

Greenpeace previously asked for the trial to be moved from Morton County to Cass County in early 2025, which Gion and the North Dakota Supreme Court denied. 

The lawsuit is against three separate Greenpeace organizations — Greenpeace USA, Greenpeace International and Greenpeace Fund.

Energy Transfer as of Wednesday morning had not submitted a response to Greenpeace’s motion for a new trial. Previously, the company has defended the jury’s verdict and disputed Greenpeace’s claims that the court proceedings were not fair.

Energy Transfer has indicated it may appeal Gion’s decision to reduce the award to $345 million.

Greenpeace will not have to pay any of the $345 million judgment for at least a couple of months, Gion ruled Tuesday.

Advertisement

Court documents indicate that the organization could have to pay a bond of up to $25 million while appeals proceed, though the environmental group has asked the judge to waive or reduce this amount. Gion has not decided on this motion.

He noted that obtaining such a large bond will be challenging.

“The magnitude of this matter defies simple decisions,” Gion wrote.

Energy Transfer in court filings urged the judge to require Greenpeace to post the full $25 million.

Any bond money Greenpeace provides would be held by a third party while the appeals proceed, according to Greenpeace USA.

Advertisement

Greenpeace International has filed a separate lawsuit in the Netherlands that accuses Energy Transfer of weaponizing the U.S. legal system against the environmental group. Energy Transfer asked Gion to order that the overseas suit be paused while the North Dakota case is still active, which Gion denied. The company appealed his ruling to the North Dakota Supreme Court, which has yet to make a decision on the matter.

North Dakota Monitor is part of States Newsroom, the nation’s largest state-focused nonprofit news organization.



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending