Bo Storedahl, of Yacolt Mountain Mine operator JL Storedahl and Sons, right, and Clark County Resident Gary Ogler discuss with county staff during a meeting regarding mine operations March 22.
Clark County hosted its first of several meetings regarding the operation of the Yacolt Mountain Mine with hopes to address concerns from nearby residents over the effects the mine has on their quality of life.
On March 22 a few dozen gathered in the Clark County hearing room for the first meeting of the Surface Mining Advisory Committee, an ad hoc group facilitated by county staff formed to analyse mining operations. The group’s membership is informal, as Clark County Community Development Director Mitch Nickolds explained that the only participants present at every meeting would be county staff.
For the first meeting, the rest of the representation was made up of residents both within the vicinity of the mine as well as those who have seen the effects of traffic from trucks going back and forth from the operation. Bo Storedahl, representing mine operator JL Storedahl and Sons, was also present to speak on the business’ behalf.
The first meeting was primarily about letting residents voice what concerns they have about the mine operation, something that many who testified said had been more of an issue in the last few years. Chief concerns were noise from blasting operations, the effect of truck traffic on county roads and the potential for dust and debris from the operation affecting the environment.
Seven Clark County residents testified at the meeting, as well as Storedahl. Resident Dick Leeuwenburg said that one of the core issues was a lack of trust between residents, the county and the mine operators. Part of that lack came from the confusion over what standards and regulations the mine is subject to.
“A great number of people have tried to come to the county and say ‘what are the rules (the operator is) supposed to be following, and the county is unable to answer,” Leeuwenburg said. He added that he has seen little feedback from concerns and complaints submitted to the county.
“We have not been diligent in ensuring that trust was robust,” Nickolds remarked, adding that the county would “make some changes” to remedy the situation. He pointed to Clark County Public Works Director Ahmad Qayoumi, who was present at the meeting, who explained his department was working on systems to bolster reporting accountability. As an example, Qayoumi said his department was currently evaluating the potential of placing cameras along roads where Storedahl trucks operate in order to monitor the frequency of trips.
Nickolds said his department was looking at modifying the code enforcement process to make it more effective. Prior to testimony, he laid out the current process which could take weeks if a violation was appealed. He said one of his main priorities through the end of the year and into 2020 was making the enforcement process “as responsive as possible for our community.”
“This is something that’s going to take some time,” Nickolds said, noting that Community Development was working with the county prosecuting attorney’s office to make sure any speeding up of the process was legal.
Resident Gary Ogier referenced a hearings examiner decision from 2002 with a number of conditions for mine operations.
“I was shocked that this was 17 years old because it’s the same issues that come up at every public hearing and have not been resolved,” Ogier remarked. Last year both the county planning commission and Clark County Council had hearings regarding the expansion of a surface mining overlay on county planning maps which brought out residents who voiced concerns over operations as a whole.
Ogier’s chief concerns are dust and blasting, the latter of which he recalled as being able to shake his house from miles away. Storedahl said dozens of residents receive mail notices seven days before a scheduled blasts.
Resident Mark Rose said although he could appreciate the mailed notices, there would be other alternatives he felt would be more effective, such as utilizing social media or email. Nickolds suggested having Storedahl email the county the blast schedule, allowing the county neighborhood coordinator to provide that information on locally-focused websites like Nextdoor.
Storedahl said that blasts occur about every two weeks with the same frequency throughout the year. He noted that although frequency hasn’t increased recently the removal of trees in the area could have led to more noticeable blasts. He added that a plan to store dirt on some of the mine property would help to mitigate the blasting’s effect, should it be approved.
“We have a lot to cover,” Nickolds remarked toward the end of the meeting, though he said during the testimony the county received “fantastic feedback” for the next steps. He said the fundamental question would be if there were reasonable solutions to meet both the needs of the residents as well as the mine operators.
Nickolds said that prior to the next meeting, which was initially scheduled for April 5 but after a consensus vote of those present was pushed back, county staff would be tasked with clarifying the requirements of the mine laid out in the permits for the operation.
“Both for the community and the operators, and the enforcers. We all need that information,” Nickolds said.
