La Plata County planning commissioners will decide Thursday to recommend approval or denial of a land-use permit for King II coal mine, though county officials say neither will halt business operations.
Tonight’s meeting will be a continuation of Wednesday’s, at which planners heard from county staff, mine officials and the public.
Most commenters on Wednesday were miners and truck drivers employed with King II, on County Road 120 in Hesperus, and their supporters who appealed for their jobs.
“I’ve lived in Durango almost 42 years,” said Joe Zuber. “I’ve had many conversations on how people in Durango make a living. My response is always that Durango is a unique community with businesses and employers other communities don’t have. We have King coal, the train, Fort Lewis College, Mercy hospital, Purgatory, the airport and the Southern Ute Indian tribe, and we can’t afford to lose any of these entities.”
But the economy they fervently defended does not seem to be threatened by the county permitting process:
County attorney Sheryl Rogers said if county commissioners deny King II’s application, GCC Energy (which owns the mine) can appeal that decision in district court, which is intended to be an expedited process. The judge can overturn the board’s decision if he or she finds it “arbitrary and capricious,” and in the meantime, business would not have to stop.
“The county would have to ask the court to issue an injunction,” Rogers said. “We’d have to ask for a cease and desist, or ask to allow operations with some regulations.”
County planners and County Road 120 residents said they want to see road improvements and traffic mitigation – not King II’s closure.
More than 1,000 pages of county documentation outlines the planning department’s stipulations, which include paying for road improvements, adhering to a four-phase time frame and providing refined plans for noise buffering.
After staff recommended denying the permit, mine representatives said they agreed to $10 million in road improvements, a per-ton maintenance fee and a traffic cap – though they said the cap would cut production by 30 percent.
A bituminous coal-producing extension of King I, the underground mine operated about three years after opening in 2007 before the county determined a land-use permit was necessary despite the mine’s location on federal land.
Negotiations proceeded at a glacial pace, which some blame on the mine, while others say the county’s stipulations are excessive and its bias has poisoned the negotiating process.
Luke Danielson, an attorney representing concerned citizens, said Wednesday that particle pollution in some surrounding areas of King II is double or triple Environmental Protection Agency limitations.
Other commenters shared photos of mine trucks operating during inclement weather, which is prohibited.
“We don’t want to shut this mine down at all,” said County Road 120 resident Julie McCue. “We want quality of life. We want to not worry what we are breathing. This gets back to what was promised by GCC at the continuance meeting (last October): they said they would reduce truck speeds. It seems quality of life does not matter, but money does.”
The meeting will be at 7:30 p.m. in the county board room at 1101 E. Second Ave. Planners will hear GCC’s rebuttal to staff presentations before making a decision. The board’s recommendation will go to the Board of County Commissioners, which will make the final decision.
jpace@durangoherald.com
