The battle continues and we need to step up and send letters and STOP this unlawful amendment being presented by the Linscotts.
The Linscott amendment is attempting to change grandfathered (nonconforming) land use for quarries, and their own land.
The amendment would change the date of when the nonconforming land use starts from 1981 to 2008.
Also it would allow Idaho Department of Lands(IDL) to be the controlling oversight(with DEQ) of quarries and change from any oversight and laws from our County and Bonner County Revised Code(BCRC).
Our BCRC says quarries would need to get a Conditional Use Permit if they grow beyond a certain point since 1981, Linscotts would like this date to change from 1981 to 2008 because they have outgrown by 400% of what is legal now.
WE AGREE WE NEED GRAVEL - and we all agree laws need to be followed to protect everyone, not just the nonconforming quarry owners like the Linscotts. Nonconforming laws are set up to protect the neighboring properties.
Here is our attorneys letter regarding this amendment and how it is illegal. (CLICK HERE FOR LETTER)
We know the Supreme Court questioned the Linscott pits growth and expansion and the County Commissioners did NOT listen to the public regarding the BCRC this is what happened:
“Further, the County acted in a manner that was arbitrary and capricious in refusing to address the gravel pit’s compliance with the nonconforming use provisions of BCRC. We award CAL(Citizens Against Linscott) costs and reasonable attorney’s fees on appeal.”
Also said in this document is
“...it is difficult to imagine how a factfinder could conclude that the gravel pit is in compliance with the nonconforming use provisions of BCRC.”
You can see the full document here:
Why would Linscotts want to change our BCRC?
Well our attorney felt for several reasons but here are a few:
1. Avoid getting a Conditional Use Permit – meaning conditions may be applied to them. (such as those in 1995 – see here
2. Since the Supreme Court called out the Linscott pit for overgrowth and not following the BCRC, the Linscotts would like to spot zone(ILLEGAL TO DO) and change the laws to attempt to avoid following the laws.
Any land acquired after 1981 is unlawful to expand upon, including encroached land, even though they held non-disclosure agreements to settle disputes or land was purchased for settlement causes. Land purchased, no matter if they have an IDL reclamation plan or not, does not make the land legal per our BCRC for expansion of nonconforming land use.
Is the state the best to control the 90+ quarries in Bonner County or should the pits also follow local laws and our nonconforming land use laws in our BCRC?
How has IDL been doing so far and keeping Linscott pit in line?
Has Linscott Pit followed the laws of IDL in the past?
Absolutely not!
In 1997 Frank Linscott did a reclamation plan for IDL where he claimed to have 30 acres exposed. Due to the fact his claim of exposed land is less than 40 acres, he only has to have an Assurance Bond. (Super cheap insurance for reclamation).
He continues to tell IDL he has ONLY 30 acres exposed all the way until 2018. See below for proof. BUT IN 2014 a fly over by IDL finds 100 acres exposed and send Frank Linscott a letter in December 2016 (SEE HERE) WITH THIS MAP (SEE HERE)
They asked Linscott to deposit money $248,900 into an account for reclamation and explained he does not qualify for an assurance bond(cheap).
He ignores it!
Linscott completely lies to department of lands (see here whole story) and sends out a post card in 2018 where he claims he has expanded from 30 acres to only 32 acres - exposed.(SEE HERE)
AS you can see Linscotts pit has not followed IDL and BCRC. (SEE HERE) and in this letter here to the County commissioners by our attorney explaining expansion was unlawful in 2018.(SEE HERE)
Citizens Against Linscott Interstate talked to IDL and then they did an audit of Linscott Pit.
They had fines facing up to 1.8 MILLION DOLLARS - SEE this
Did they make the deadline for payment? NO, and still only face $10,000 for lying to the state for over 30 years.
This is why Linscotts would love to keep dealing with IDL. IDL cannot keep track of the 90+ pits, even the largest one in Bonner County, the Linscott pit, and let them off with a very light penalty.
Amendment hearing is May 17th at 5:30 at the County Building.
(YES, night of elections)
Letters need to be written please by May 10th but still write if later, as this will go to the County Commissioners eventually.
So I ask you to please send a letter to
Planning@Bonnercountyid.gov
Contact your County Commissioners and tell them this is NOT RIGHT and we don’t want another lawsuit!
RE: AM0004-22 Linscott Amendment
And share any and all information that this is ILLEGAL and you ask for the county to recommend denial of this application.
To help you with your letter, here are some more facts:
We are not against asphalt plants or gravel pits. We are against having different laws for some and not for all.
We are not against the Linscott Pit, but request they follow the laws like anyone else that would want to have a gravel pit and start it right now. Grandfathered land has rights, and we have not attempted to stop those rights. We have attempted to the Linscott pit into following the laws when they have pushed to put an asphalt plant in to expand their pit, or to make expanding legal beyond what is in our code.
What is nonconforming land?
A nonconforming use, building or parcel is a use of land, a structure, or a parcel that was lawfully in existence prior to the adoption or amendment of the zoning ordinance that made it nonconforming. Nonconforming land allows continuation to not financially burden the owner, but it is not to continue forever, but to eventually end.
When was Linscotts pit and other gravel pits grandfathered in? December 1981 and it should stay this date and all quarries should have to follow the local laws.
Why should a Conditional Use Permit be required for quarries which are nonconforming land?
To protect the neighborhood, community, natural resources and to keep the rural character.
For example, when an applicant request a CUP, the county and the County Commissioners, (SHOULD) require the applicants to have conditions that minimize the effects on the community and neighborhood, because they would be allowing a business or activity to continue with conditions, because it's not legally allowed in that area any longer.
Nonconforming land is to be discontinued eventually, not added on with other things, such as an asphalt plant, or to expand to be way larger, like 400% bigger, beyond what is legally permitted such as the pit is now, according to our Bonner County Revised Code.
This is to eliminate problems and disruptions, and protect everyone surrounding the business. Examples would be: hours of operation, forced monthly testing of the aquifer, adding a turn lane on road for safety and so forth.
For FULL amendment details go here
Questions please contact Citizens Against Linscott Interstate at
nosagleasphaltplant@gmail.com
or to help with expenses please email.
To see a bunch more documents regarding this fight you can also go to