REV00579 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Moms W. Kegley, Esq. August 6, 2004 Page 2 Peabody's $7,000 per year counteroffer (reducible to $1,000 per year under certain circumstances) is less than one half of the amount payable under the 1976 agreement, less than one-seventh of the annual payment amount that the Barkers' proposed, and less than one half of the amount that the Barkers were offered by RAG a year ago . Such a counteroffer can only be classified as a very "low ball" offer, and does not indicate to the Bazkers that Peabody is serious about resolving this matter. The Barkers are currently exploring the option of building a road into their property directly from Coal Mine Road (once a county road that was ceded to Peabody's predecessor with certain requirements for maintenance and continued access). Since Peabody apparently intends to continue to deny the Barkers their legally-protected right to use the historic access route into their property, construction of the contemplated road would simply moot that issue. Under these circumstances, the Barkers can only reject Peabody's counteroffer, and withdraw their own offer. While the Barkers remain willing to negotiate with Peabody to resolve this situation, they will do so in the future only if Peabody is able to demonstrate to their satisfaction that Peabody is truly serious about resolving this situation. The Barkers simply do not have the money to pay lawyers to engage in futile negotiations with Peabody. If it is Peabody's intent to resolve this matter by legal action rather than by negotiation, the Barkers are prepared to defend against any such action, and to counterclaim for continuing trespass. As we discussed at some length at the July 21, 2004 settlement meeting, all of the reclamation work done by Peabody and its predecessor on the Barkers' land since July of 2003 has been done without legal authority and constitutes trespass. Mike, I am very sorry that the settlement meeting and the Barkers' subsequent offer did not result in a successful resolution of this mattes When I left the July 2151 meeting, I had high hopes that we would be able to come to an agreement that would be acceptable to everyone involved -the Barkers, Peabody and the State of Colorado. Unfortunately, it appears that my optimism was misplaced. Very truly yours, M. Julia Hook for Fognani Guibord & Homsy, LLP cc (via fax): Robert A. Bassett, Esq.