Below are the lastest Briefs in Wisconsin Supreme Court Case No. 2013AP591 for which oral arguments will take place on January 8, 2015, at 1:30 p.m. in Madison, WI:
- December 5, 2014, Defendant-Respondent-Petitioner’s Reply Brief, Wisconsin Supreme Court Case No. 2013AP591, Oneida Seven Generations Corporation & Green Bay Renewable Energy, LLC v. City of Green Bay
Excerpt:
OSGC’s brief completly ignores the Circuit Court’s decision, which might explain its indecorous posturing.
In a tacit acknowledgement of what lies in the record, OSGC now argues that any misstatements were “wholly inconsequential,” said “in passing,” or were “slips of the tongue,” and that they could not have reasonably misled anyone. OSGC seems to be saying that applicatns can say what they want prior to municipal approval as long as the record contains some qualifying fine print. That should not be the law of Wisconsin. OSGC should have simply presented its proposed facility (“Facility”) to the City in an accurate manner.
• Instead of saying its emissions would be clean and that there would be no hazardous materials, OSGC could have said that there would be emissions of toxins but that it was uncertain about the particular contaminants and levels.
• Instead of representing that there would be no stacks, OSGC could have said that there would be stacks but it was not yet certain about the number and size of stacks necessary to disperse the hazardous emissions.
• Instead of saying that the char byproduct could be used in organic farming, OSGC could have said that some of the char may be used as additives in roads but that most of it would be landfilled as hazardous waste.
• Instead of saying that the project was similar to others throughout the world, OSGC could have said it would be the first privately owned “for profit” facility employing a new pyrolysis technology. [Footnote: OSGC’s project was not market driven. (See OSGC App. 232 identifying over $23 million in public funds to be committed to the project).]
OSGC made its own bed and, after a public hearing, the City revoked the [Conditional Use Permit] because it believed it had been misled
Be sure to read Pages 10 and forward as the City of Green Bay explains in detail and gives examples of the following:
The 140 pages of information (see OSGC’s App. 571-712) establish that OSGC’s pre-developed talking points were hardly “slips of the tongue,” but were repeated at town hall meetings and open houses. (See, e.g., OSGC App. 572, 637.)
See also:
The City of Green Bay’s December 5, 2014, Reply Brief is in response to the bilge in this Godfrey & Kahn job which attempts to defend OSGC’s & GBRE’s sleazy doings:
- November 13, 2013, Appellants’ Brief, Wisconsin Supreme Court Case No. 2013AP591, Oneida Seven Generations & Green Bay Renewable Energy, LLC v. City of Green Bay
Shorter version of OSGC & GBRE Brief:
Shame on you for believing what we said! Only a fool would take us at our word! How naïve must you be to think that a shady real estate holding & leasing company that doesn’t pay its bills, least of all to its own shareholder, and recently lost millions in its recycled toilet-paper business had somehow become experts in the energy secctor and could successfully run a first-of-its-kind for-profit municipal waste incinerator without possibly endangering your constituents? You must be daft! Now, give us our undeserved permit back.
By now, few people are truly “shocked” that Oneida Seven Generations Corporation, its various subsidiaries, its Corporate Board, and its executives were untruthful and remain untrustworthy, least of all the General Tribal Council of the Oneida Tribe of Indians of Wisconsin which voted on December 15, 2013, to dissolve OSGC:
The City of Green Bay acknowledges the importance of property rights, and agrees with the WRA that revocation of zoning permits should not be undertaken lightly. However, representations in the course of obtaining those permits should also not be made lightly or carelessly, and where misrepresentations are made a municipality has the right to revoke the permit. Substantial evidence supports the City’s decision, and the Court of Appeals’ Decision should be reversed.
Oral arguments before the Wisconsin Supreme Court will take place in Madison, WI at 1:30 p.m. on Thursday, January 8, 2015, and can be listened to live at this link:
