Tuesday, May 13th, 2008...7:26 am
Sears and…Naw To Easy
I haven’t written anything yet on the alliterative Robert Robuck, the candidate who is taking on Ramón Valadez in the Democratic primary for County Supervisor. One Valadez booster I talked to was convinced that Robuck was recruited by Ray Carroll to run against Valadez. If so, he didn’t prepare this guy for his run too well.
Early on, Robuck told folks that he was running because of his opposition to the Rosemont Mine. Funny thing to use that as a justification to take out Valadez given how many of the actions of the board against the mine have been unanimous. Now he says that he’s not a “one issue” candidate.
He’s been handing out flyers (Xeroxed, come on Ray, get your buddies to open up the checkbook!) that names four issues: Water Supply, Environmental Protection/Sustainable Growth, Election Integrity and Alternative Energy. Three of those issues are ones where Valadez has been strong on, and I realize that election integrity activists are not happy with the guy but he came around after he was pressured. As much as I support that issue, it doesn’t seem to be the one that will take down a candidate as strong as Valadez is.
Not only that, but the bromides that Robuck gives on these issues indicates to me that he doesn’t have the grasp of them that would mean that he could go toe to toe with Valadez, or his potential colleagues for that matter. For example, this is from his flyer:
WATER SUPPLY: Reliable and renewable water resources are the lift [sic] blood of our communities in Pima County and must be effectively managed for our future needs.
We must manage water, because we need it to drink and stuff. Nobody has brought that up in any election for county supervisor in the entire 145 year history of Pima County, right? Geez. You want to show that Valadez is out of touch with the “real issues” and all you can come up with is this kind of Tommy Shanks rhetoric? Those of you out there that are backing this guy (and I’m sure I’ll hear from you) better hope he does a bit better than this before September rolls around.
4 Comments
May 13th, 2008 at 8:01 am
“If so, he didn’t prepare this guy for his run to (sic) well.” Just pointing out your typo, should be “too”. Also, unanimous is misspelled above in paragraph 2. You need to use spell check.
Isn’t this Robert Robuck’s first try at a political office?
May 13th, 2008 at 8:31 am
Dagnabbit.
I shouldn’t really write these so early in the morning. Thank you.
May 13th, 2008 at 4:25 pm
Now If you had called me for interview, you might know the real story. I was not recruited by Ray Carroll, that is just the same old Bull(BS). I guess you were not to well prepared to write this article this morning, just look at all of your missed splelled words.
I have two degrees, an AA in Business, a BA in Business Administration and worked as a Business Analyst/Programmer for E*Trade, an online Bank and Brokeragr firm.
I first got involved with my community over the water issue with Rosemont. Rosemont Copper Company has acquired a parcel of residential property (about 50 acres) near my home and plans to put in several wells, at depths of 1,300 feet, to continuously pump 6,000 acre-feet of groundwater (our drinking water) each year for the next 20 years. They will transport this water 15 miles up to and over the crest of the beautiful Santa Rita Mountains to it’s mine for processing copper ore. The pumping of so much water will dry up as many as 200 domestic wells in my neighborhood, at depths of only 200 to 300 feet, which supply the drinking water for up to 400 families. It also has come to my attention that there is already a land subsidence issue in my area of up to 2.4 inches from groundwater depletion, excessive pumping of groundwater, in a 8 month period between 02/23/2007 and 10/26/2007. I believe that if Rosemont Copper Company is allowed to transport 1,955,226,000 gallons (which is the same as 6,000 acre feet) of our ground water away from our area each year, the land subsidence will get even more severe at even a faster rate, and this will drastically affect our communities for years to come. I’m hoping that something can be done immediately to protect the communities of Sahuarita and Green Valley from the same fate as Pinal County, where the subsidence issue is measured in tens of feet instead of inches.
Water is critical to the citizen’s of Pima County since we live in a desert. But to many people seem to forget that, because of the CAP water. Personally, I believe that our water resources are “the life blood of our communities” because without water you have no community. Secondly “There must be a balance between new development and our unique desert environment” means I support the Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan. We need to protect our open desert areas. I also believe because we live here in Southern Arizona, we should support development of new energy-saving technologies and energy codes, like “The TEP Guarantee Houses” which save energy usage.
It’s time to use common sense solutions for the common good of Pima County!
If you would like to give Contributions to Robert Robuck’s Campaign checks should be made to “Elect Robuck 2008″. Please include your occupation and employer on check (required by law). Maximum contribution is $390.00 per person. Thank you for your support.
Elect Robuck 2008
P.O. Box 263 Sahuarita, Az 85629
May 15th, 2008 at 12:50 am
Robert, what exactly are your policy differences with Valadez in relation to the question of Rosemont?
In all likelihood, that mine is going in. And as far as water, those permits are already approved. I join the vast majority that thinks this is an absolutely terrible thing, both for water drawdown and water contamination, but also because the eastern slope of the Santa Ritas will be irreparably scarred. But this is all despite what I have perceived as the best efforts of Pima County.
The core of the problem lies both with the federal 1872 Mining Act and the fact that the primacy of water rights for mines is solidly enshrined in Arizona law.
The 1872 Mining Act essentially opens up federal lands to mining under a must-issue permit system. This is an antiquated and flat-out bad law. It needs to be changed. Unfortunately, the Senate Majority Leader and the President are staunch defenders of the mining industry. And even if we can move the legislation in the next Congress, Rosemont’s permitting will already be complete. But still, I think there should be a strong community, grassroots push to change this legislation so that in the future, Arizona’s communities can be protected. Congressman Grijalva and Congresswoman Giffords have both been very responsive on this issue. But we need to join forces with other like-minded groups and individuals across the country to pressure House and Senate leadership to bring this important legislation to the floor for a vote and passage.
Secondly, I think we need to put a constitutional amendent on the ballot that will relect the modern realities of Arizona’s water situation and will treat mining and agriculture accordingly. I’d be happy to help organize the effort for 2010.
The sad fact is that it will be exceedingly difficult to challenge Rosemont’s claims. The law is on their side. In my opinion, the best thing we can do now, in addition to continued resistance, is try to mitigate as best we can the impact of Rosemont’s presence.
An additional 6,000 acre feet, while no small amount of water, will not do irreparable damage to the aquifer over 20 years. The neighboring FICO pecan orchards use five times that much water annually. It will, however, disrupt local wells. It’s terrible, Robert, that this includes your family. I think Rosemont can and should be held responsible for the damages caused to local residents.
Aquifer-wide though, I think residents should consider and accept Community Water Company’s plan to extend the CAP pipeline to provide the means to deliver an alternative water supply and recharge water in the Upper Santa Cruz Basin. I know this is controversial, and I know many folks think CWC is a shill for Rosemont, but I know that this is not the case.
Given the fact that Rosemont’s water permits have already been approved, the residents of the Upper Santa Cruz basin have absolutely nothing to lose by extending the CAP. The new pipe would deliver enough water to offset Rosemont’s usage, and while it’s admittedly not a perfect solution (water quality of CAP versus groundwater, distance from extraction site, etc.), it’s certainly better than nothing.
Full disclosure: I used to do some work for Community Water, but I haven’t for several months now and I still believe in the value of the pipeline project, and I certainly believe in the sincerity of the supervisors in their opposition to the mine. Also, since I haven’t been following this as aggressively on a daily basis in the last few months, if I’m factually wrong because something has changed, I apoligize.
Sorry also for the long post on an old thread… I had just stopped by to congratulate Tedski on the DNC, but I felt this needed to be said.
But really, Robert, if Valadez has wavered in his opposition to Rosemont, I’d really like to know about it, because I’m unaware.
Leave a Reply