Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Neb. 26~i, 196 N.W.2d 181 (1972). <br />Plaintiffs do not allege that the notice issue is con- <br />stitutional in scope, and correctly so. No constitutional <br />issue i5 involved in this case. <br />Z. The second procedural irregularity alleged by <br />plaintiffs as having fatal impact upon the Spillers applica- <br />tion is the failure of the published notice to specify a com- <br />pletion date for the mining operation. Again, plaintiffs <br />in support of their assertion cite C.R.S. 1973, 34-32-112(10)(b), <br />overlooking that this section pertains to major mining oper- <br />ations zind not to limited impact operations such as the <br />Spillers.' gravel pit. <br />Plaintiffs have not alleged that the failure of the <br />published notice to set a completion date for the mining <br />operation was in the slightest degree prejudicial to them. <br />At the August 27, 1980 meeting of the board plaintiffs did <br />not even inquire as to a completion date. If such date <br />were a matter of interest to plaintiffs they Should have <br />raised the issue at the meeting of the board. It was of no <br />concern to them then (transcript pp. 10-39). <br />3. The third procedural irregularity which plain- <br />tiffs contend is fatal to the Spillers' permit application <br />-6- <br />