GENERAL40745

• Permit No: M1981148
• IBM Index Class Name: General Documents
• Doc Date: 12/24/1983
• Doc Name: VERIFIED COMPLAINT
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

for the City's agreement to provide written confirmation to the Board, based upon affi-
davits and other information provided to the City by Robeo, that use of the subject area
for mining did not contravene municipal zoning ordinances. The agreement also reserved
to the City the right "to review and render its opinion" on any amended application
Robeo submitted to the Board. 1 /
I~JOn or about August 26, 1983, the law firm of Gorsuch, Kirgis, Campbell,
Wa and Grover, in its capacity as_Ci~ Attor~, sent a letter to Robeo confirming
that the Cit of o osp a the use of the subject p_ro~rty for clay mining.' A c~ opy of
i attar is attached hereto as Ez ibit C and incorporated herein by this reference.
16. The letter referred to in paragraph 15 of this Complaint clearly reserved the
City's right, as owner of the surface of part of the affected property and as owner of
adjacent property, to review and comment upon the permit application submitted to the
Board.
L7. On or about August 26, 1983, Robeo submitted a~w permit applieation~~
(hereafter "New Application") for the Chieftain South Mine. A copy of the New Applica-
tion is attached hereto as Exhibit D and incorporated herein by this reference. Exhibit D
does not include maps and certain other attachments which were submitted to the Board
with the New Application. The area covered by the New Application is more fully
described as:
Part of the SE 1/4 SE 1/4, SW 1/4 SE 1/4, NW 1/4 SE 1/4,
NE 1/4 SW 1/4, NE 1/4 NW 1/4, SW 1/4 NW 1/4 and NW 1/4
NW 1/4, and the SE 1/4 NW 1/4, Section 25, and part of the
SE 1/4 SW 1/4 and SW 1/4 SW 1/4, Section 24, Township 4 South,
Range 70 West, 6th P.M., Jefferson County, Colorado.
18. On or about Se tember 1 1983 the Mined Land Reclamation Division of the /
Color o Department o aura . esources (hereafter "Division") sent standard Division //
forms to Robc ,;Jeffersort~County, and the City, informing the parties that the New
Application s tentative~~ o be heard by the Board on November 17, 1983. A
copy of the rce- eceiv'~ the City is attached hereto as Exhibit E and incorporated
herein by this re et cence
~97` On or about September 14, 1983, Mr. John Hissem, who represented Robeo,
representatives of the Division, and the Consultant met to review the Original Applica-
tion and the New Application. The City was not advised of the meeting and no represen-
tative of the City attended the meeting.
2 ~ Upon information and belief, at the meeting referred to in paragraph 19, the L~
D' r lfu y
21. On or about October 26, 1983, the Board approved the New Application
subject to receipt of performance and financial warranties as required by ~ 34-32-117 of
ivis oncro decided that Robeo need not comply with the statutory requirements `p
for newspaper notice and notice to adjacent and surface landowners, as set forth in 3~•
~ 34-32-112 of the MLRA, and rescheduled consideration of the New Application for the
October 26-27, 1983 meeting of the Board.
-3-