Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Residents urge Lake County to comment as state reviews reopening of Leadville mill
Loading...
Summary
Residents raised health, water and road‑maintenance concerns and urged the Board of County Commissioners to submit formal comments during a condensed state public comment period for CJK/United Milling Company pplication to reopen the Leadville mill.
Ruth Goldsher, a member of Concerned Citizens for Lake County, urged commissioners to register the county s an objector and submit comments to the state review of CJK/United Milling Company—ourth application to reopen the Leadville mill, saying the state llows only a 10‑day public comment window after notice.
"My name is Ruth Goldsher, and I'm a member of Concerned Citizens for Lake County," Goldsher said, and she warned commissioners that "they are gonna assume if they don't hear from you, you have no objection or comment to the proposed activity." She told the board that failing to comment could forfeit the county's later opportunity to participate in state hearings.
Other residents appealed to commissioners on technical and financial grounds. Steve McAuley, a Leadville resident, focused on truck traffic and local maintenance costs, warning that the mill—ould generate continuous heavy truck movements. McAuley said the increased wear and snow‑clearance needs could impose "essentially $485,000 a year" in additional costs on county roads and about $3.25 million over a seven‑year operating period.
A technical coordinator working with Concerned Citizens emphasized environmental and long‑term liability risks. He said the applicant had prepared a tailings plan that covers only "10% of 500,000 tons" of expected tailings, flagged uncertainty about water sourcing (which he estimated could equal water use for roughly 350 households annually), and noted about 510 domestic wells within a two‑mile radius that could be affected by drawdown or contamination.
County staff and counsel told speakers that comments made at this time would not become part of the formal record for any future county land‑use proceeding; they advised residents to restate concerns at the county planning hearing if and when a county application is filed. The board did not take any action on the mill application during the meeting.
Next steps: residents said the state notice was expected to post soon and urged the county to file comments during the 10‑day window so the county could participate in subsequent state proceedings and preserve the opportunity to engage with DRMS and with any later county hearings.
