Laserfiche WebLink
;ent By: Klauzer 8 Tremaine, LLC; 970 879 1131; Aug-27-03 4:09PM; Page 2/3 <br />RECEIVED <br />KLAUZER & TREMAINE, LLC AUG 2 7 2aa3 <br />Attorru°_ys [rt latw <br />P.O, Bux 774525, Steamboat Springs, Colorodn 81/477 <br />320 Lincoln Avenue -~Socond Floor <br />Randall w- Klauzer Phunc: (970) 879-5003 Fax: (970) 879-1131 <br />Membct, COMnWo Baz ktiaw.coin <br />J. Richard Tccmainc <br />Membu, Colorado, D.C, and Virginia Ban <br />August 27, 2003 <br />VIA FACSIMILE (303) 832-810b <br />State of Colorado <br />Division of Minerals and Geology <br />Atten: Tom Schriever <br />1313 Shennan St., Room 215 <br />Denver, CO 80203 <br />Rc: LaFazge <br />Dear Mr. Schriever: <br />Division olMinerals & Geology <br />Claire E. Sollars <br />Member, Colorado wd Wyoming Hate <br />James "Sandy" Horner <br />Member, Colorado and Wyoming aara <br />This letter is a follow up to the conversation you had today with my pazalegal, Karen Dierkes, <br />regarding the pre-hearing set for August 28, 2003. My interpretation of the package I received <br />fmm you with respect to the hearing is That this was a matter between the applicant and the State. <br />To be notified today that you are expecting myself and my client to be present at a hearing <br />scheduled for tomorrow did not allow us the opporiunity to make arrangements to attend this <br />hearing. T1~erefore, as Ms. Dierkes explained to you today, we will not be able to attend the <br />heating on August 28, 2003. <br />!n addition, as Ms. Dierkes mentioned to you today, T received a copy of the LaFazge response <br />on August 25, 2003 which T have not had the opportunity to review as of this date. <br />Your package to me discussing the pre-hearing did not specifically stale our presence was <br />needed nor required. T understand front Ms. Dierkes, that it is your position that our absence <br />from this pre-hearing may cause my client to be dismissed from this proceeding. This result <br />would be unfair and inappropriate, since the objections raised were related to deficiencies in the <br />LaFarge application, and my client's concern as an adjacent property owner. <br />Unfortunately, I:have the following commitments tomorrow: <br />-court hearing in the morning <br />- major realestate closing; and <br />- special district board meeting tomorrow evening. <br />The combination of these commitments precludes me from heing able to attend your hearing or <br />provide a more detailed responso at this time. <br />