12.02.12 Seitz said the key is to pass a mining bill and address concerns of the tribe later

Read this article online.

Defeated mining measure changes backed by Gogebic lobbyist

By Lee Bergquist of the Journal Sentinel Dec. 2, 2012

EMAIL PRINT (89) COMMENTS

A representative of the company at the center of the debate over state mining laws says a bill that lost narrowly in March remains the best hope to revive a plan to build an iron ore mine in northern Wisconsin.

"They've got kind of a wait-and-see attitude," said Bob Seitz, a lobbyist for Gogebic Taconite, which proposed a $1.5 billion iron ore mine in Ashland and Iron counties.

But he said Gogebic is inclined to move forward with an application to build the massive mine, if lawmakers remove language in current law that Gogebic sees as presenting needless delays in the review and regulatory process involving a mine that could operate for decades.

The changes are best embodied in legislation that passed the Assembly and was modified by the Legislature's Joint Finance Committee, he said. The bill was defeated by a single vote in the Senate, prompting Gogebic to say it was pulling out.

Since then, the company has been tracking developments in Madison from its offices in Hurley as a skeleton crew scouts projects in Michigan's Upper Peninsula and other parts of the country. Gogebic has been drilling for iron deposits in Michigan - something it hasn't done on property in Wisconsin, where the company has an option on land with proven iron ore deposits.

Gogebic is owned by Cline Group, based in Florida, which mines coal in Illinois and Appalachia.

March's close mining vote, and the bitter legislative fight surrounding it, underscored the sharp partisanship that still exists in the Legislature.

Republicans were eager to score a big economic victory as Gov. Scott Walker faced a recall. But Democrats, many of whom favor mining, said the changes sought by Gogebic and the GOP weakened environmental protections.

Democrats and environmentalists continued to voice those concerns last week and raised worries that Gogebic and Republicans are ignoring external factors such as the rights of a Chippewa tribe downstream from the proposed mine site. Democrats are expected to fashion their own changes starting this week, but with the knowledge that Republicans take control of both houses of the Legislature in January.

Starting point

On Thursday, former mining executive Tim Sullivan told a Senate committee that the Assembly bill is a starting point but needs changes. He balked at detailing them, however, frustrating some senators.

Sullivan has expressed private concerns that the Assembly bill's rollback of environmental protections - most Republicans believe there is no weakening of environmental laws - would spur protracted litigation and scare investors for future projects away.

Sullivan emphasized to members of the Senate Select Committee on Mining that Wisconsin is not the only regulatory player. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency also are involved. He said a rewrite of state mining laws could put the state at odds with federal authorities, which would then exert the upper hand.

Speaking to reporters, Sullivan said that even with roadblocks removed, it could take five years or more for a company to begin actual mining.

However, Seitz, a former legislative aide who also was a policy aide for Republican Gov. Tommy G. Thompson, said Gogebic expects a faster process than that.

He said the political landscape has changed since March. Republicans will continue to control the Assembly, and the Republican majority in the Senate will increase to 18-15.

"We think that, with who will be in the Legislature, the votes are there," he said.

He noted that 16 members of the incoming Senate, including two members of the Assembly who will be in the Senate, have already voted for mining legislation that Gogebic supports.

Incoming Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald (R-Juneau) agreed that the Assembly bill is the place to start.

"But things are really fluid right now," he said Friday, emphasizing that lawmakers must act on a mining bill quickly.

On Friday, Fitzgerald tapped Tom Tiffany, a former member of the Assembly from Hazelhurst who was elected to the Senate in November, to chair the Workforce Development, Forestry, Mining and Revenue Committee when lawmakers return in January. Tiffany was a strong supporter of the Assembly bill.

The panel, controlled 3-2 by Republicans, will have a big hand in mining legislation. The other two GOP members on the committee are Sens. Alberta Darling (R-River Hills) and Glenn Grothman (R-West Bend).

Seitz said Gogebic and Walker have discussed the company's concerns on several occasions.

On Wednesday, Walker said that if a bill is passed early next year, Gogebic could get started in 2013.

Seitz clarified the governor's comments. Passage of a bill would not give Gogebic the go-ahead to start mining. But the new law would include changes the company wants in pre-application work that would let the company start gathering data on streams and wetlands in the spring when water levels are high.

"That's why it's so important to get this done before spring - just a few months and you lose a year," Seitz said.

George Meyer, a leading spokesman for environmental and conservation groups, said the Assembly bill faces roadblocks, even if it passes. A lawyer, he is a former secretary of the state Department of Natural Resources and executive director of the Wisconsin Wildlife Federation.

Meyer predicted that language that would allow a mining company to destroy wetlands by allowing them to be filled would invite litigation because it violates state law.

Also, he said the ability of the Bad River band of Lake Superior Chippewa to regulate water quality is a powerful factor that lies outside the state's control. Based on his experience as DNR secretary, he predicted that the EPA "will lean over backward" to support the tribe because of the federal government's trust responsibilities with Indian tribes.

Gogebic's proposed mine is in the Bad River watershed, which runs through tribal land.

Seitz said the key is to pass a mining bill and address concerns of the tribe later.

But Meyer told senators that tribal issues are huge, and that parties who want a mine built need to establish a closer relationship with the Bad River.

Indian tribes have a value system different from non-Indians and place a greater importance on matters such as clean water that go beyond ecology to cultural and spiritual beliefs, Meyer said.

"Think about what we would do to protect our border," he said. "That's their homeland."