To the Editor:

Dakota Energy refused to act according to bylaw member petition on dropping the lawsuit against East River and require a 2/3 vote to change wholesale power supplier. They have conducted small group meetings of members to badmouth and present half-truth information about Basin Electric and East River.

Again they had only Board of Directors, Manager, Lawyer, or Guzman representatives present at the meetings.

Why are they afraid to let members listen to East River and Basin Electric? These are good organizations, set up by the Board’s predecessors over 75 years ago.

Why did the Board of Directors sign a Letter of Intent with Guzman without member/owner knowledge, not do an engineering study, and try to award a multimillion dollar contract that may not be consistent with Article of Consolidation Article VI, Paragraph 6 (To contract for purchase of electric power and energy from a generation and transmission electric cooperative…”)?

The Board is trying to break up East River Cooperative and make Dakota Energy a stand-alone organization.

East River has contracts that are available to the membership with no nondisclosure statements. East River Board of Directors is made up of rural people/farmers from the 25 cooperatives across South Dakota/eastern Minnesota area. Dakota Energy Directors approved the policies of East River and ultimately Basin Electric. Why did the Board serve subpoenas on their own members who asked questions or circulated petitions? Is it to harass, intimidate, or silence? Member/owners will end up paying for Dakota Energy’s group of lawyers for subpoenas and other maneuvers.

Guzman has contracts with nondisclosure clauses so the membership does not know what they contain.

Guzman’s Board of Directors is made up of out-of-state, “Big Investment” representatives whose sole function is to make money for their investors.

These are my views.

Twyla Folk
Huron