Winehole23
10-11-2021, 02:44 PM
Private companies directly paying police to their bidding is a little too on the nose.
Over the last year, Enbridge has paid over $2 million (https://theintercept.com/2021/08/27/enbridge-line-3-pipeline-police-training-intelligence/) to Minnesota police to enforce laws targeting protesters against the pipeline. The nature of the financial relationship between Enbridge and Minnesota law enforcement is laid out in the Line 3 construction permit (https://healingmnstories.files.wordpress.com/2020/05/line-3-route-permit-2.pdf) issued by the state public utilities commission, requiring that the company deposit funds into a “Public Safety Escrow Account” managed by a state-selected third-party liaison.
The permit authorizes reimbursements for “maintaining the peace in and around the construction site” and related activities. Police have been reimbursed for activities including (https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/20617967/line-3-public-safety-escrow-account-disbursement-summary-sheet-1.pdf) training, equipment, and “Line 3 Protest Response.” The funds are not supposed to be used for equipment aside from undefined “personal protective gear,” although according to reporting by the Intercept (https://theintercept.com/series/policing-the-pipeline/), police have requested reimbursement for “less-than-lethal” weapons such as (https://theintercept.com/2021/02/10/police-minnesota-enbridge-pipeline-ppe/) batons, tear gas, and flash-bang devices. Without a full public record of the reimbursements, it’s unclear which requests were approved.
While the third-party liaison reviews and approves the reimbursement requests, the functional separation of power between donor and recipient is questionable. Oil and gas companies, including Enbridge (https://insideclimatenews.org/news/12042021/laws-pipeline-protests-line-3/), have been instrumental in lobbying for the “critical infrastructure laws (https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/anti-protest-laws-threaten-indigenous-and-climate-movements)” that police use as a basis for arresting (https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/557397-dozens-arrested-during-protest-of-line-3-oil-pipeline-in) protesters at construction sites. Furthermore, local Minnesota law enforcement and Enbridge employees have maintained a close (https://theintercept.com/2021/08/27/enbridge-line-3-pipeline-police-training-intelligence/) partnership during the construction of the Line 3 pipeline, sharing office space, participating in joint training and meetings, and trading information on protest activities.
https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/how-oil-company-pays-police-target-pipeline-protesters
Over the last year, Enbridge has paid over $2 million (https://theintercept.com/2021/08/27/enbridge-line-3-pipeline-police-training-intelligence/) to Minnesota police to enforce laws targeting protesters against the pipeline. The nature of the financial relationship between Enbridge and Minnesota law enforcement is laid out in the Line 3 construction permit (https://healingmnstories.files.wordpress.com/2020/05/line-3-route-permit-2.pdf) issued by the state public utilities commission, requiring that the company deposit funds into a “Public Safety Escrow Account” managed by a state-selected third-party liaison.
The permit authorizes reimbursements for “maintaining the peace in and around the construction site” and related activities. Police have been reimbursed for activities including (https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/20617967/line-3-public-safety-escrow-account-disbursement-summary-sheet-1.pdf) training, equipment, and “Line 3 Protest Response.” The funds are not supposed to be used for equipment aside from undefined “personal protective gear,” although according to reporting by the Intercept (https://theintercept.com/series/policing-the-pipeline/), police have requested reimbursement for “less-than-lethal” weapons such as (https://theintercept.com/2021/02/10/police-minnesota-enbridge-pipeline-ppe/) batons, tear gas, and flash-bang devices. Without a full public record of the reimbursements, it’s unclear which requests were approved.
While the third-party liaison reviews and approves the reimbursement requests, the functional separation of power between donor and recipient is questionable. Oil and gas companies, including Enbridge (https://insideclimatenews.org/news/12042021/laws-pipeline-protests-line-3/), have been instrumental in lobbying for the “critical infrastructure laws (https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/anti-protest-laws-threaten-indigenous-and-climate-movements)” that police use as a basis for arresting (https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/557397-dozens-arrested-during-protest-of-line-3-oil-pipeline-in) protesters at construction sites. Furthermore, local Minnesota law enforcement and Enbridge employees have maintained a close (https://theintercept.com/2021/08/27/enbridge-line-3-pipeline-police-training-intelligence/) partnership during the construction of the Line 3 pipeline, sharing office space, participating in joint training and meetings, and trading information on protest activities.
https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/how-oil-company-pays-police-target-pipeline-protesters