Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Gold/Mining/Energy : PolyMet Mining (PLM) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Paul Lee who wrote (1)	4/30/2007 8:59:57 AM
From: Paul Lee	Respond to of 23

PolyMet opponents win court victory By Marshall Helmberger Opponents of PolyMet Mining’s plans to use a site near Floodwood for wetlands mitigation have won a significant court ruling that puts county logging and other activity in the area on hold. The ruling also voids an agreement between PolyMet and St. Louis County to allow the mitigation project, an agreement that the county board approved last year. District Court Judge Heather Sweetland, on April 17, ruled in favor of an ad hoc organization of local residents, calling themselves the Wetlands Action Group, and issued a temporary injunction on any further activity at the site. The group contends that St. Louis County approved the mitigtion plan and proceeded with logging and other activities at the Floodwood site before completion of PolyMet’s environmental impact statement. According to the court ruling, the county had been warned by the state’s Environmental Quality Board and the Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy that such approval could violate state and federal laws, which prohibit approval of a project or portions of a project prior to final completion of the environmental review process. Despite the warnings, then-county attorney Alan Mitchell had advised the board to approve the agreement with PolyMet anyway. Just days after the county approval, the county land department sold the timber at the site and the property was logged over this past winter. The county argued that it had the right to log the county-managed land, because the logging was not associated with the mining project proposed by PolyMet and was, therefore, not a part of the environmental review process. But the judge disagreed with the county’s arguments, and indicated the county action compromised the environmental review process. The judge also awarded plaintiffs their court costs and attorneys fees. “We think it’s a good ruling,” said Bob Tammen, a longtime resident of Soudan, who was a plaintiff in the case. Tammen said residents in the vicinity of the Floodwood site are strongly opposed to the mitigation plan and question the value of wetland restoration in a former wetland that has already been restored “by nature and the beavers,” according to Tammen. Monday, April 30, 2001907 Volume 18, Issue 17 PolyMet opponents win court victory By Marshall Helmberger Opponents of PolyMet Mining’s plans to use a site near Floodwood for wetlands mitigation have won a significant court ruling that puts county logging and other activity in the area on hold. The ruling also voids an agreement between PolyMet and St. Louis County to allow the mitigation project, an agreement that the county board approved last year. District Court Judge Heather Sweetland, on April 17, ruled in favor of an ad hoc organization of local residents, calling themselves the Wetlands Action Group, and issued a temporary injunction on any further activity at the site. The group contends that St. Louis County approved the mitigtion plan and proceeded with logging and other activities at the Floodwood site before completion of PolyMet’s environmental impact statement. According to the court ruling, the county had been warned by the state’s Environmental Quality Board and the Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy that such approval could violate state and federal laws, which prohibit approval of a project or portions of a project prior to final completion of the environmental review process. Despite the warnings, then-county attorney Alan Mitchell had advised the board to approve the agreement with PolyMet anyway. Just days after the county approval, the county land department sold the timber at the site and the property was logged over this past winter. The county argued that it had the right to log the county-managed land, because the logging was not associated with the mining project proposed by PolyMet and was, therefore, not a part of the environmental review process. But the judge disagreed with the county’s arguments, and indicated the county action compromised the environmental review process. The judge also awarded plaintiffs their court costs and attorneys fees. “We think it’s a good ruling,” said Bob Tammen, a longtime resident of Soudan, who was a plaintiff in the case. Tammen said residents in the vicinity of the Floodwood site are strongly opposed to the mitigation plan and question the value of wetland restoration in a former wetland that has already been restored “by nature and the beavers,” according to Tammen. Monday, April 30, 2001907 Volume 18, Issue 17 timberjay.com