Lawsuit between Comstock Residents Assoc., Storey County, Comstock Mining over

Set Text Size SmallSet Text Size MediumSet Text Size LargeSet Text Size X-Large
Share
Updated: 5/01/2013 5:50 pm
5/1/13 - CORRECTION - A lawsuit between the Comstock Residents Association, Storey County and Comstock Mining is over.

Court documents show Comstock Residents Association sued Storey County, arguing large mining haul trucks are a potential health hazard to the community, so they should not be allowed to use Highway 342.

A judge ruled, though the county can put a restriction on hauling, they decided not to. It is completely legal for Comstock Mining to use the highway.

News 4 spoke to a Comstock Mining spokesperson who says they are now using their own hauling roads and not using Highway 342.




VIRGINIA CITY, Nev. (KRNV & MyNews4.com) -- Comstock residents have won the lawsuit against Storey County and Comstock Mining regarding Storey County hauling ore from open pit mining operations in Virginia City.

Comstock Residents Association says the suit was in response to the 2012 request from Comstock Mining, Inc for an amendment to its special use permit allowing large mining haul trucks on State Highway 342.

Storey County Commissioners stripped this condition from the permit in July of last year and mining haul trucks took to the road for the better part of six months.


Share
6 Comment(s)
Comments: Show | Hide

Here are the most recent story comments.View All

stevefunk - 5/2/2013 2:38 PM
0 Votes
I hope you'll take what's written here to heart and revisit this story. CMI's spin is entirely self-serving and ignores the facts and deeper implications of the decision. This is a travesty in our own backyard that is destroying our Virginia City National Historic Landmark. More journalistic diligence is appropriate here and an investigation into the relationships between CMI and the county is warranted. Why, for example, would a county wish to appeal a decision that has affirmed it's power to protect its land-use and responsibility to its citizens? Follow the money.

likearocknv - 5/1/2013 8:46 PM
1 Vote
I find News 4's coverage of this story confusing. Is there a winner here? Doesn't look like it. Sounds to me that 'business as usual' is being rephrased, repackaged and further allowed. Maybe I can get into large scale excavations without a real permit too? All I need to do is fill out a temporary permit then on with the pillage and plunder. I find it highly unfortunate that this ruling comes after CMI had already moved off the HWY. Even though this has badly damaged the Comstock Hwy, CMI is also looking at using the same HWY through Silver City in Lyon Co. to haul ore to a second refining area nearer to HWY 50 in spring valley just east of Mound House. This would be absolutely devastating to Silver City and the Comstock district. It would be nice if the news coverage on this issue actually covered the story rather than buzzing a few words and moving on.

Highstreet - 5/1/2013 7:55 PM
1 Vote
P.S. — here is a fuller version of the story: http://www.nevadatravel.net/travelgram/cmiupdate13-4.html

Highstreet - 5/1/2013 7:40 PM
2 Votes
Here's a correction to your correction. You state: "A judge ruled, though the county can put a restriction on hauling, they decided not to. It is completely legal for Comstock Mining to use the highway." Not true. The Storey County DA told the Commissioners they couldn't do anything but okay the trucks on the highway, so that's what they did and that's why they did it. While it is legal for the trucks to use the highway, this decision was based on bad legal advice. Another correction to the correction: "a Comstock Mining spokesperson . . . says they are now using their own hauling roads and not using Highway 342." Not true. CMI has been granted a TEMPORARY permit to use a BLM right-of-way while its formal application is being reviewed. The importance of the decision is this: Storey County Commissioners can't hide behind District Attorney Maddox's mistaken advice that they had no authority to keep the trucks off the highway. Yes, they can allow the trucks to use the highway, but if they do it's on them, not any state statute. And the County argued against its own interest! It fought to give up its authority to protect the health and welfare of its citizens. Incredible, isn't it? Not in Storey County it isn't. This is the Transylvania of Nevada, where the deals are done by the light of the moon.

GoldHill - 5/1/2013 7:14 PM
2 Votes
You still don't have this story right. The county DA said that a condition that had been in the mining special use permit since 2000, that prevented the industrial haul trucks from using the highway was illegal and therefore the county could not keep the trucks off the highway. The court found this argument to be in error, stating "The court concludes that Storey had the authority to impose the no-use-of-the-highway condition." It seems that the Storey officials had no interest in protecting the community, but instead of stating that, they simply said "We have no authority." Now the court has told them that they did and do have the authority.

nubgnngs42 - 5/1/2013 12:33 PM
0 Votes
1. you don't really tell what the Lawsuit was for and 2. Winning it means what? Both your tv story and this one are very empty.
NEWSCASTS ON DEMAND

What's On

All content © Copyright 2013 Intermountain West Communications Company. All Rights Reserved. For more information on this site, please read our Privacy Policy and Terms of Service.
You may also view our Sitemap

Inergize Digital This site is hosted and managed by Inergize Digital.
Mobile advertising for this site is available on Local Ad Buy.