Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Environmental Superfund topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Commissioners pause consent ratification, request work session after County Road 31 sampling plan draws Superfund concerns

3319643 · March 18, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

After questions about sampling scope and possible Superfund liability, the Board of County Commissioners declined to ratify a consent-agenda sampling item for County Road 31/31A and ordered a public work session with CDPHE, EPA and the U.S. Forest Service.

County commissioners declined to approve one consent-agenda item March 18 that would have authorized sampling and limited materials-management tasks on or adjacent to County Road 31/31A, and directed staff to schedule a public work session with state and federal agencies to clarify sampling plans and potential liabilities.

Commissioner Padgett asked for a full sampling plan: how many cores, depth of cores, and where samples would be taken. Board members said the public and elected officials should be briefed before the county consents to sampling on road shoulders or near privately held mine features. Staff and the county attorney said they had discussed a possible memorandum of understanding (MOU) with the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE) to add an additional level of review for development activities related to historical mining contamination, but that any MOU or ordinance would be returned to the board for action.

Staff said CDPHE and the U.S. Forest Service have been involved in early discussions and that a work session including CDPHE, EPA, the Forest Service, the AG's office and representatives of the potentially responsible private entities would be scheduled in summer. Commissioners asked for written sampling plans (number and location of borings, methods) and explicit written assurances that data collection would not automatically create county financial liability or be used to tag the county as a PRP.

The board agreed not to ratify the consent item and made formal requests that staff produce the sampling plan, identify agencies and parties to attend, and brief the board publicly in a work session before permitting or authorizing further field testing on county rights-of-way.