Laserfiche WebLink
Page 3 • <br />James Lockhart <br />May 25, 1999 <br />meeting to consider the Conditional Use Permit. There were two other parties at that meeting that <br />made comments on public access, but none of the people who were most concerned even appeared. <br />Therefore, we must conclude that in all probability an additional sign at the gate for the Reclamation <br />Permit notice would not have made any difference. <br />We must point out that most of the concerns raised by objectors to the Reclamation Permit <br />were matters of primary interest to local government and yet, even when provided the opponunity to <br />address those issues with those who are most able to find resolution, the County Commissioners, none <br />of the parties even appeared. In shore, it appears to us with two newspaper publications (state and <br />county) and two sign postings (state and county) there has been adequate notice given and all notices <br />provided were in accordance with legal requirements. <br />We certainly have no desire to discourage you from being a party to this hearing as that is your right. <br />But we wished to provide you with a formal response to your concerns and to state our position with <br />respect to your concerns. <br />%R~e~s/p e~c t f ~u~l l y, <br />Mark A. Heffner <br />cc: Division of Minerals and Geology <br />State Board of Land Commissioners <br />Castle Concrete Company <br />