Laserfiche WebLink
JoEllen Turner <br />970 -864 -7682 p.4 <br />Dear Editor: This is an article to help people understand things that have happened involving WFC and <br />the Morgans. All the rumors are flying rampantly without any facts. Threats to JoEllen Turner on <br />numerous occasions by WFC Emloyees or fiends of Employees in documentations. Threats such as "I <br />hate JoEllen Turner, I wished some one would kill her, I wished she were dead. Others stating that <br />someone should cut off my head and bury me in the pit with the farm and no one would know. Others <br />stating that JoEllen Turner has no right to challenge WFC. <br />MR. Morgan and his family purchased the Morgan property in 1959. It has been continuously irrigated <br />and cropped during that period and Mr. Morgan is and has been the largest shareholder of the CCC <br />Ditch . This Ditch delivers water from the San Miguel River to the local farmers and ranchers in this <br />area. Pr -07 has been submitted several weeks back, as some of you may have noticed in the Local <br />Forum. November 26 of 2012 the Morgans proceeded with Civil action in District court in Montrose <br />where a Judgment was given for failure of WFC to carry out the requirements of the Colorado Surface, <br />Mining, and reclamation Act as well as the rules and regulations promulgated there under. As a result of <br />this Judgment, WFC was ordered to pay attorney fees of approximately 143,000 and expert witness fess <br />of approximately 97,000, as well as court cost. They were also charged with breaching the lease. These <br />rulings were a result of lack of diligence to make sure that all facts were presented to the State as well <br />as honoring the rules and regulations governing prime farmlands. Many rules and the ACT were broken. <br />A prime farmland investigation (2.04.12) had never been done for the Morgan Property or anywhere <br />else for over 15 years. NRCS had documented many years, approximately 40, that the Morgan property <br />was prime farmland. This was ignored and WFC presented MR -51 and M R -57 that changed the use of a <br />two lift operation of the soils. This was a requirement by the Act as well as by all rules and regulations <br />governing any agricultural soils, prime or non - prime. (4.06). Approximately 198, 358 cubic yards of <br />soils were removed from the Morgan property and put on neighboring properties. This is <br />documentation submitted by WFC concerning soils prior to mining , in permits as far back as 1998, <br />when a soil survey was completed. The Morgan property has had no reclamation done in 10 years. The <br />law requires this to be done in a "timely" manner as was East of 2700 Road. <br />The proper procedures to objecting to things that might adversely affect a and owner are to first file an <br />objection, next request an informal hearing, next request administrative review, then a formal hearing <br />before the Mine Land Reclamation Board, and then lastly a judicial review in District court. All the time, <br />if one feels that the Sate is not abiding by their rules, then the Office of Surface mining can also be <br />contacted. These are done in a set time frame of which, even if you are a day late, they will not be <br />accepted. <br />WFC mines ALL private lands. These farmers are paid like the Morgans, $1.40 per ton for the coal or <br />more. This amount for the Morgans, as public record will show, was approximately a million dollars <br />since 1998. In return, WFC sells the coal which they got approximately 12 million dollars for the coal <br />from the Morgan property. In the years that Morgans were productive, since 1998, the One million <br />dollars would be an obtainable figure from production if they had not chose to lease the property. The <br />Morgans chose to lease the property because they had the coal, they had many family relatives either at <br />WFC, Tri- State, or San Miguel Power. At no time did the Morgans ever engage in any action to shut the <br />mine down. They know the value of "CHEAP" energy versus green power and at no time did they want <br />