PERMFILE114773 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

purely technical; procedural basis. Colorado courts consistently hold that procedure cannot prevail over substance when strict adherence to procedural requirements will harm substantive rights. "Unless enforcement of procedural requirements is essential to shield substantive rights, litigation should be determined on the merits and not on the basis of technical rules." Trans Shuttle, Inc. v. Public Utilities Comm'n of the State, 58 P.3d 47, 50 (Colo. 2002); citing People v. Dickinson, 592 P.2d 807, 808 (Colo. 1979). The merits of this matter indicate that the City has an irrefutable right to fully participate in this application process and should not be barred by strict adherence to procedure requirements. The proposed quarry has the potential to harm several of the City's substantive rights that aze recognized and protected by the Board's permitting process. Among those rights, and as is more fully discussed in the City's Motion for Determination of Standing, the City's water rights aze put in jeopazdy by this application. The City's stake in the Black Hawk-Central City Sanitation District Wastewater Treatment Plant, which includes a $410,000 investment as well as the governmental responsibility to ensure the safe and proper treatment of its allocated 575 acre-feet of effluent at the Plant, is also put in jeopardy by this application. See Black Hawk's Exhibit 24, Intergovernmental Agreement by and between Central City, Black Hawk, Gilpin County, and the Black Hawk-Central City Sanitation District, attached hereto and incorporated herein. In addition, Black Hawk has a direct governmental interest in the proper operation of the Plant. Black Hawk obtained a Colorado District Court decree for a plan of augmentation in Case No. 94CW036, which allows Black Hawk to utilize effluent from the Plant as a source of substitute supply for diversions made upstream on North Clear Creek. See Black Hawk's Exhibit 22, attached