office memorandum county of kern memorandum county of kern to: scott denney date: march 17, 2010...
TRANSCRIPT
Office Memorandum
County of Kern
To: Scott Denney Date: March 17, 2010
From: Engineering & Survey Services Phone: 862-5093
Floodplain Management Section
Alejandro Gonzaga
Re: CUP 27, Map 196, Cup 41, Map 213, CUP 22, Map 214, Golden Queen Mining
This department has no comments.
Page 1 of 2
From: "Jeff Veselenak" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Date: 03/11/2010 10:21 PM
Subject: RE: Soledad Mt Project SEIR
CC: "'Paul Johnson'" <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, "'Dick Albright'"
<[email protected]>, "'Simon Perez'" <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>,
<[email protected]>, "'Roger'" <[email protected]>, "'Mark Campbell'"
<[email protected]>, "'Sir Richard James, McDonald'" <[email protected]>,
Hello Scott,
I thought of one more concern. If the Gold Queen Mining Company venture goes bankrupt and there are
outstanding environmental problems, is Kern County going to be responsive in fixing the problems, especially
given the depleted fiscal state of affairs projected throughout the state? In such a case could this cause the county
to tip into bankruptcy?
Jeff
From: "Jeff Veselenak" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Date: 03/10/2010 10:04 PM
Subject: RE: Soledad Mt Project SEIR
CC: "'Paul Johnson'" <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, "'Dick Albright'"
<[email protected]>, "'Simon Perez'" <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>,
<[email protected]>, "'Roger'" <[email protected]>, "'Mark Campbell'"
<[email protected]>, "'Sir Richard James, McDonald'" <[email protected]>,
Hello Scott Denney,
I have reviewed the attached plan and have several concerns:
1) I am one of the closest residents to the proposed mining operations, and I currently have a well producing
around 5 gallons per minute. I am really concerned that even with the proposed mitigations that I will loose
ground water and have unacceptably producing well.
2) Further, I am concerned about the potential contamination of the groundwater resources. Their plan does not
thoroughly explain the risk of this occurring, particularly because of my close proximity to the mining operations.
3) The plan makes one realize that there are many aspects that need to be monitored by the county and other
agencies and given the fiscal realities of these agencies and municipalities, I have no confidence that there will be
adequate and timely oversight.
Could you please address my concerns in writing by March 31, 2010. Thank you very much for sharing this
information.
Page 2 of 2
Sincerely,
J. Jeffrey Veselenak
4058 Maxwell Avenue
Mojave, CA 93501
661-209-6276
From: Paul Johnson [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, January 14, 2010 5:02 PM
Cc: Scott Denney
Subject: Soledad Mt Project SEIR
Dear Interested Party;
Pursuant to your conversations with this Department's staff, attached is a copy of the Executive Summary from
the Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) for the Soledad Mountain Project by Golden Queen
Mining Co.. A copy of the entire document (SEIR) is now available on line at:
http://www.co.kern.ca.us/planning/pdfs/eirs/SoledadMtn/SoledadMtn_vol1_ch1-10.pdf
Please be advised that the document is relatively large and may take a few moments to load. The "Table of
Contents" for the document is located behind the distribution list on page 61 of the document. Once there you can
access the various chapters of the document by clicking on the "blue" text links.
As stated in the Notice of Availability (NOA) you were sent, the comment period for the SEIR ends on February
25, 2010 at 5:00 p.m.. Comments submitted on the SEIR should be sent to the attention:
Kern County Planning Department
Attention: Scott F Denney, AICP
2700 M Street, Suite 100
Bakersfield, CA 93313
If you have questions regarding the project, please contact Mr. Denney at (661) 862-8631 or [email protected]
Page 1 of 1
From: Mark Leseman <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Date: 03/15/2010 11:18 AM
Subject: Golden Queen Mining co. permit
Scott, Once again, Thanks for taking the time to call me and update me on info about this proposal as
well as Gold Town. This proposal appears to do nothing to help the value of my property, which is
already extremely difficult to market. If they are willing to buy up the property adjacent to their project
at a reasonable price, I would agree to the proposal. I do realize there are a number of other factors in
this decision, as well. Thanks again, Mark Leseman (651-707-5498) Forest Lake, MN
Page 1 of 1
From: "Randall Klotz” <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Date: 03/26/2010 2:42 PM
Subject: Soledad Mountain Gold Mine Project
Scott Denney, Sr. Planner
KERN COUNTY PLANNING
2700 "M" Street, Suite 100
Bakersfield, CA 93301-2323
Re: Soledad Mountain Gold Mine
Dear Scott,
Brett Karlovich, President of Pacific States Land Company, would like to send letters to all of the Planning
Commissioners before the public hearing takes place on April 8, 2010. Before this is done, we would like to get
some clarifications from you with respect to the following:
1. Encroachment - Unpatented Mining Claim. The gold mine project line encroaches on 7 parcels located at
the Northwest corner of the Gold Town Subdivision. Golden Queen claims this land as an "Unpatented Mining
Claim." We believe this is an ineffective claim. The Gold Town Subdivision was created many years ago and is
a valid DRE subdivision. Pacific States Land Company was a bona fide purchaser years ago with no notice of the
mining claim. The 7 affected parcels have been sold to subsequent bona fide purchasers. The project line should
be corrected, and any references to the mining claim removed, before this project goes to public hearing.
2. Electrical Substation. There is an Electrical Substation planned for construction on the Northwest corner
of the Gold Town Subdivision. This is problematic for several reasons. First, Golden Queen does not own the
land. Second, an industrial use is not allowed by the CC&R's for the Gold Town Subdivision (only residential
and commercial uses allowed). Lastly, this would be an unsightly and aesthetically unappealing use next to a
residential development. The electrical substation should be moved off the Gold Town Subdivision before this
project goes to public hearing.
3. Explosives Storage. There would be explosives stored adjacent to the Gold Town Subdivision on the
Southerly boundary. This is not acceptable next to a residential subdivision. The storage area for explosives
should be moved before this project goes to public hearing.
4. Drainage Wash. There is a drainage wash that skirts the northerly face of Soledad Mountain. This might
flow from west to east toward the Gold Town Subdivision, and then it crosses the Gold Town Subdivsion at a
point that is easterly of Soledad Mountain. We are concerned that drainage runoff from Soledad Mountain and
Heap Leach Mound No. 1 will drain into the wash and then directly into the Gold Town Subdivision. We would
like to hear the County's plans and recommendations regarding moving Heap Leach Mound No. 1 before the
project goes to public hearing.
Sincerely,
Randall B. Klotz, Esq.
Klotz Law Group
(619) 368-4971