HomeMy Public PortalAbout2018.10.04 Email J Rygh FW_ Midas Community AgreementFrom:Anette Spickard
To:BessieJo Wagner; Erin Greaves
Subject:FW: Midas Community Agreement
Date:Thursday, October 04, 2018 11:38:24 AM
fyi
From: jtrygh <jtrygh@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2018 11:20 AM
To: Jackie Aymon <jaymon@mccall.id.us>; Bob Giles <bgiles@mccall.id.us>; Colby Nielsen
<cnielsen@mccall.id.us>; Melanie Holmes <mholmes@mccall.id.us>; Thomas Sowers
<tsowers@mccall.id.us>
Cc: Anette Spickard <aspickard@mccall.id.us>
Subject: Midas Community Agreement
Dear City Council Members:
I am writing to urge you to proceed with caution in evaluating the Community Agreement
(CA) being proposed by Midas Gold. I understand that there is some community support for
such an agreement, but I fear that much of this enthusiasm may be based primarily on
information that until recently has only been provided by the Midas Gold public relations
team. I encourage the council and those involved in discussions with Midas to put on their
skeptic hats and exercise a high degree of due diligence. Midas Gold is not a philanthropic
social welfare organization; their job is to mine gold. Despite their aspirations to be both of
these things, guess which one takes priority. So it is no surprise that their desire to establish a
record of support with the local communities serves to not only portray them as a benevolent
socially responsible company, but to signal to potential investors that local support will
improve the chances of the project coming to fruition thereby assuring substantial returns on
their investment dollars (which capital-strapped Midas is in dire need of). When my elected
officials are considering offering municipal support (and by implication mine as well), to what
is in large part a private gold mine marketing strategy, I have to say I am less than thrilled, as I
hold major reservations concerning this project and the potential negative side effects that may
accrue to our community.
So what are the potential downsides of such an agreement? Perhaps it would be interesting to
ask the Midas PR people that very question. Knowing that they are proven to be extremely
adept at their job of portraying the socio-economic upside of the project, a claim of “none”
might be considered a bit suspect. As Reagan once said “trust, but verify”.
When Laurel Sayer publicly blames the City Council for slowing the adoption of the CA by
their “misunderstandings and questions” (Star News 09/27/18), that seems to belie a
frustration and impatience with involvement in the democratic process. Wouldn't an inherent
part of such a process be the acquisition and consideration of all the available information, not
just the information that Midas provides? Midas' efforts to control the dialog at the recent
Doing Democracy event at the library were apparent and I will be very curious to see the
dynamics of the upcoming panel discussions on various project-related topics. I would urge
council members to attend these events. I certainly hope the panel moderators are top-notch.
If, as more information comes to your attention, you feel that the CA is still a good deal for the
City and you garner significant public support to pursue negotiating an agreement, I would
humbly suggest you contract the services of a damn good lawyer well-versed in these sorts of
deals. There are legally binding ramifications to this. Here's just one hypothetical but not
necessarily unreasonable scenario that has occurred to me: Midas mines the site, fulfills all
their obligations for final reclamation, and is long gone (at least the Canadian parent company
is). Twenty years later, slowly progressing chemical reactions within the rock left on site result
in leached metals contaminating the South Fork of the Salmon River. Subsequently the
Environmental Protection Agency declares the place a Superfund site and they go searching
for someone to foot the remediation bill. They tend to cast a very wide net when they are
looking for responsible parties, and it would behoove the City to explore the potential legal
vulnerability that this CA might expose us to in such a situation. There are likely other
possible downsides to this agreement that need to be considered. Despite the possible financial
gains to the City, as a concerned citizen I am troubled by the aspect of being, in effect, a
shares marketing partner with Midas.
Best Regards,
John Rygh
McCall, ID