County weighs American Mineral Research application for Saint Peter Mine and broad review of mining ordinance; title cloud, foreclosures and ordinance options

The Board discussed two connected mining matters: a contested application from American Mineral Research (Saint Peter Mine property) and a separate tasking to review the county’s mining ordinance.

On the Saint Peter property, staff described a complex title history. The county obtained the parcel through foreclosure but title companies are unwilling to issue title insurance because historic records suggest mineral rights may have been severed from surface rights; staff reported finding an 1890 mineral certificate (issued by President Benjamin Harrison) but no patent, and later conveyances that reference mining claims rather than standard property patents. As a consequence, title companies declined to insure the parcel, citing historic concerns about detached mineral rights and unrecorded transactions. The applicant’s counsel has asked the county to proceed with processing the mining application and has filed a writ of mandamus in circuit court seeking an order to compel processing. Staff told the Board the county has drafted orders and materials to support the process but recommended getting any additional evidence the applicant may have (title documents or recorded instruments) and returning with further analysis; staff suggested delaying final action until they could review applicant-supplied evidence and research the chain of title. The Board directed staff to ask the applicant to submit any evidence and reconvene next week to assess next steps.

Separately, the Board reviewed an outside consultant estimate from SESP Consulting to review and update the county mining ordinance (Chapter 5.15 / Code 9.15 historically). Commissioners and staff discussed several options: (1) retain the existing ordinance and update it with consultant input, (2) repeal the ordinance and instead handle mining proposals on an ad hoc, case-by-case basis with permit conditions, or (3) prepare multiple ordinance proposals and solicit public comment. Some commissioners expressed concern about county liability and the practical consequences of permitting mining on county property where title or ownership is uncertain. The Board directed staff to draft multiple ordinance options (the County Attorney suggested proposing two or three alternatives), publish them for public comment, and schedule public hearings so the Board can compare proposals with public feedback. No consultant contract was authorized at the workshop; commissioners debated whether to spend additional consultant funds before clarifying the county’s policy direction.