05.29.14 From Jack Parker
I read it and am surprised how well it was put together. Not by a ham.
It seems to be aimed rather specifically at Iron County, therefore largely at G-Tac, and yet it seems to put all kinds of limits on them.. Like a 15mile long orebody in a compact square pit.
But if you keep reading and stay awake there seem to be provisions like "however"
Whereby a smaller local committee or board can overrule "higher authorities".
And we know how to control local "decision makers" don't we?
So who did write it, for whom,?
I STILL SAY "FIRST SHOW ME YOUR OREBODY AS COMMONLY DEFINED".
LIKE "IF YOU WANT ME TO BUY YOUR TRUCK I WANT TO SEE IT !"
OR NO DEAL.
I would also hit him with his statement concerning the "possibility" of sulfate pollution from the operation. First it is likely to be sulfide, and phosphate, then I believe that it is inevitable. Get a college or other reputable group to sample the overlying rocks, including Tyler, from one of the fresh cores, and expose them to air and moisture, for months, sampling the juice at regular intervals and photographing the weathering effect. So they might be set in relatively shallow plastic bins or trays. Several hundred pounds. That simple test could be a "showstopper" which saves a lot of grief.
……..The proposed PUD ordinance was authored by zoning administrator Tom Bergman and attorney Chris Jaekels. It is still in preliminary draft form and quite a ways from being passed by the zoning committee. The zoning committee is a responsible group. After they pass it, it will be sent to the county board for a hearing and passage……..