I’ve noted before the contention that has been taking place for the last several years between the sand & gravel extraction industry and local governments.  The bill that was passed in this year’s legislative session – H.B. 355 Mining and Critical Infrastructure Materials Amendments – seemed to give a lot of clout to gravel pit operators to expand both their operations and their footprints without much involvement from the city or county in which they are located.  The bill does say the local govs can impose some restrictions, but they must be based on evidence and threaten local health and safety.  It has seemed almost a foregone conclusion that this will be an issue in the next legislative session.

A story last week in the DesNews discusses the results of a study required by the state Division of Oil, Gas and Mining, detailing how the costs of these materials would increase dramatically if they must be hauled in from even moderate distances, which of course would have an impact on the cost of housing and infrastructure development.  This is a valid point.  But there is also a valid point about the impact such operations can have on nearby urban areas, particularly homes.  Striking a balance here is what is needed, but seems ever more difficult.

What was rather of interest to me were the comments of some of the legislators, on the gravel issue specifically, yes, but more pointed about the feelings of neighbors and residents – essentially the NIMBYs.  First, Rep. Casey Snider, sponsor of HB355, said,

“So what I’m trying to balance here are those de facto mineral rights, which we’re trying to narrow the scope on. So the reason I outline that is, the legislative body does have the right to identify critical concerns relative to the particulars of the project, health, welfare and safety.  They may identify mitigation measures that must be implemented. They can have those. They can impose any sort of regulation as consistent with state code, but they can’t prohibit the expansion if all of the terms and all of the faults are remedied that they outline in their public process.”

On the issue NIMBYism, Sen. Dan McCay had this to say:

“I’ll just dialogue for just a second, but it is interesting to realize those who have a home are really, really excited to prevent others from having homes near them. It really is a painful reality that we have entered into. I worry that my generation is going to shift. You know, we had the greatest generation not too long ago, and then, you know, their children, and then we’re going to get to my generation, which seems to be turning into one of the most selfish generations ever. I offer that just to say gravel is not attractive. Nobody wants it across the street from their house, but at the same time, they would never give up their own home that’s built on the foundation of gravel.”

I think we could be in for an interesting legislative session next year.