GENERAL40745 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

• .x ~'' ~~~~ ~~. ~^ ,`u~C!ryy the MLRA. The Board set the financial warranty at Ninety-Nine Thousand and No/One Hundredths Dollars ($99,000.00). 22. On or about November 1, 1983, the Board issued a permit to Robco to mine the area known as Chieftain South Mine. '~ 21 Neither the Board nor Robco informed the City that the Board had granted I~ Robc permit for the Chieftain South Mine area. J ~-J On or about November 1 1983. Mr. Jim Peterson, a City Planner in the City's Department of Community Development, sent to Mr. Peter V. O'Connor, Reclamation Specialist at the Division, a letter outlining the concerns and comments of the City regarding Robco's New Application. A copy of this letter is attached hereto as Exhibit F and incorporated herein by this reference. 25. On or about November 16, 1983, Mr. Stanley Weedon of the City's Depart- ment Community Development telephoned the Division seeking information about the hearing scheduled for November 17, 1983. He spoke with Mr. O'Connor who informed him that the Board had already considered the New Application and issued the permit. Mr. Weedon requested a written explanation of the Board's action. ~i ~ `~ On or about November 17, 1983, Mr. O'Connor wrote a letter to Mr. Weedon ~ outlining the history of Robco's permit applications and the reasons for the Board's action granting the petition without notice to the City. The letter also addre a of the ~ II concerns and comments raised by the City in its November 14 letter to the oard. A copy of this letter is attached hereto as Exhibit G and incorporated herein by this refer- ence. Yy ~ Sections 34-32-112(10)(b) and (10)(c) of the MLRA require that an applicant /'~ o"' for a permit cause notice of his application to appear in a newspaper of general circula- ~ ~~ tion and also that the applicant mail a copy of the notice to all owners of surface rights of the affected land and to the owners of record of land adjacent to the affected land. I 28. The City owns the surface rights to a portion of the property subject to the ', New Application and the City owns land adjacent to the property subject to the New Application, as may be seen from the property descriptions and deeds encompassed in the Agreement between Robco and the City, a copy of which is attached to this Complaint as Exhibit B. FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF 29. Plaintiff incorporates paragraphs 1 through 28 as if the same were incorpo- rated herein. 30. By the receipt of Exhibit C, the Board was aware that the City expressly had reserved its rights to comment upon Robco's proposed mining and reclamation plan after the plan was submitted to the Board. -4-