Continue with onX Maps
Continue with Facebook
Saving Oak Flat- does anyone care? -C&M throwdown-
|
Ahh, so knee jerk. Show me where the AG or the court proved, or even mentioned, bribery with Councilman Gutierrez. Didn't RCM actually have a part in turning in Rep. Renzi? The fact is that the current council, which consisted of 4 members, of whom 2 lost horribly in their 1st real election, chose to hide the vote against the 2nd mutual benefits agreement (which took 6 months to pass) and break the agreement in an executive session, is going to change with 2 new members recently elected and understand the needs of the town. kirra wrote: perhaps that offer & question should be directed to the fellow quoted from FB though I'll respond as I may be thirsty soon... CFR 30 57.XXX that you speak of regulates mining procedures and is not the correct area to look for ethics violations. A better place may be here: US Office of Govt Ethics -Conflicts of Interest - I believe that every State also has their own interpretation by Statutes (Colorado does): Links to States' Legislative Ethics & Lobbying Laws We should perhaps offer a case o'beer to the AG of AZ who had the 'tener cojones' to call out Resolution Copper Mining for bribing the public officials in Superior Town. I heard the local details & rejoiced. RCM has bribed the climbing community as well. You should be outraged if you have the cojones! cheers- -------------------------------------------- For those who missed the Iranian connection - Resolution Copper, Rio Tinto and Iran |
|
The Iran connection, really, talk about a smear campaign. kirra wrote: perhaps that offer & question should be directed to the fellow quoted from FB though I'll respond as I may be thirsty soon... CFR 30 57.XXX that you speak of regulates mining procedures and is not the correct area to look for ethics violations. A better place may be here: US Office of Govt Ethics -Conflicts of Interest - I believe that every State also has their own interpretation by Statutes (Colorado does): Links to States' Legislative Ethics & Lobbying Laws We should perhaps offer a case o'beer to the AG of AZ who had the 'tener cojones' to call out Resolution Copper Mining for bribing the public officials in Superior Town. I heard the local details & rejoiced. RCM has bribed the climbing community as well. You should be outraged if you have the cojones! cheers- -------------------------------------------- For those who missed the Iranian connection - Resolution Copper, Rio Tinto and Iran |
Ben Beard wrote:Ahh, so knee jerk. Show me where the AG or the court proved, or even mentioned, bribery with Councilman Gutierrez....The town is broke, so they went to the mine and threatened them before the hearing.No knee jerk -It's pretty simple to hear & observe from no matter what distance that you have personally aligned yourself with the Mine. The Colorado card will never work for u in any debate here. We attend Council meetings (thanks to the miracle of flight) and discuss regularly with local citizens who perhaps know quite a bit more than what is mentioned to you in any meeting. Unfortunately it seems anything you have to contribute here is likely propaganda we're all quite familiar with. Perhaps you should open a "Lets Mine Oak Flat" thread? I will add additional info. on AG & move on. AGs do not usually waste taxpayers $$ and also tend to be the only resource & recourse at times against local municipal corruption. Discussing Resolution Copper ethics is time wasted at this point -they have no ethics other than profit. The Mine will do as they want to the People's Land if Congress and the people let them. The Town of Superior was hurting before Resolution Copper showed up and offered a drink of water from a poison cup -have a nice day Superior Councilman sued by Attorney General Tuesday August 14th, 2012 The Arizona Attorney General’s Office filed an indictment against Superior Town Councilman Hank Gutierrez for voting on an agreement between the Town and Resolution Copper Mining while he was allegedly a contractor with the company, possibly violating conflict-of-interest statutes. According to the indictment, Gutierrez 'possessed a substantial interest' in the agreement between the Town and RCM. In 2008, RCM signed a Mutual Benefits Agreement (MBA) with the Town that provided funding for town improvements following completion of the Southeastern Arizona Land Exchange and Conservation Act. The Town of Superior in return agreed to work together with the company. In Dec.2010, RCM renegotiated the agreement with the Town recognizing that the land exchange bill was taking longer than expected to be approved by Congress. At that time, the company began negotiations with several members of the Superior Town Council to identify provisions that could provide additional and immediate support to the community. “Our company policy is not to comment on pending legal proceedings and any questions regarding potential conflict of interests should be directed to the Town of Superior,” Resolution Copper said in a written statement.“We can confirm that Hank Gutierrez has been a contractor to RCM since early in the project’s history.” Gutierrez could not be reached for comment. --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- |
|
It's official -Superior does not want this Mine in their backyard. Perhaps they can now be open to other ideas for business revenue. Mining is only 1 solution -it's not the only one.
Town of Superior passes formal Resolution opposing Oak Flat Land Exchange On March 13, 2013, the town council of Superior, Arizona passed a unanimous resolution opposing HR 687, the latest version of the Oak Flat land exchange. The resolution passed following a town council meeting a week ago in which the town council took comments on their decision to oppose the land exchange and end a Mutual Benefits Agreement with Rio Tinto. At that meeting, the majority of comments supported the town decision. Superior Town Council meeting During the council meeting Rio Tinto threatened to lay off it's workers if the town passed the resolution. This is similar to a threat Rio Tinto made last November to lay off most of their workers is the previous version of the land exchange, HR 1904, was not approved by Congress. There is no word yet whether Rio Tinto will follow through with their threat now that the resolution has been passed. Copy of Resolution No.451 : azminingreform.org/sites/de… |
|
Arizona Mining Reform has just created a simple way to contact your Representatives and help Save Oak Flat Climbing. |
|
You must have missed this meeting. No one person spoke on behalf of the company and no spokesman said anything about laying anyone off, just more misinformation from the anti miners. A majority of the actual residents spoke for the mine, and a majority of the visitors from Tucson, Phoenix, and elsewhere spoke against. kirra wrote:It's official -Superior does not want this Mine in their backyard. Perhaps they can now be open to other ideas for business revenue. Mining is only 1 solution -it's not the only one. Town of Superior passes formal Resolution opposing Oak Flat Land Exchange On March 13, 2013, the town council of Superior, Arizona passed a unanimous resolution opposing HR 687, the latest version of the Oak Flat land exchange. The resolution passed following a town council meeting a week ago in which the town council took comments on their decision to oppose the land exchange and end a Mutual Benefits Agreement with Rio Tinto. At that meeting, the majority of comments supported the town decision. Superior Town Council meeting During the council meeting Rio Tinto threatened to lay off it's workers if the town passed the resolution. This is similar to a threat Rio Tinto made last November to lay off most of their workers is the previous version of the land exchange, HR 1904, was not approved by Congress. There is no word yet whether Rio Tinto will follow through with their threat now that the resolution has been passed. Copy of Resolution No.451 |
Ben Beard wrote:..."What has climbing done for town of Superior? They pick up your trash -thanks for the radio tip |
|
The current bill H.B.687 is the same one that passed as H.R.1904 in the last session of Congress. |
kirra wrote: They pick up your trash -thanks for the radio tipThe town of Superior may need that service here soon. From what I heard, the town couldn't pay their trash collection bill and was threatened by the waste company over it recently. Pretty telling about the condition of the town and the town council when we can't pay our bills, but they'll send people to DC to speak out against RCM. |
|
Lobbying Dollar$ $pent- Rio Tinto Group -  |
|
Many people have left for D.C. and the Hearing is TOMORROW - today is the last day your info should be on some desk in the House of Reps. |
|
Thanks for compiling this list, Kirra. |
|
Thanks Kirra for your hard work. Also thanks to everyone who is taking time to voice opposition to this bill. |
|
Just FYI for those who may be interested--tomorrow's hearing in the House Energy & Mineral Resources subcommittee can be viewed live at 7am Arizona time. |
|
Here's the AZ Republic article about today's meeting: |
BlueFrog wrote:Let's hear it for Raul Grijalva and the representative for the Superior Town Council who are speaking up for Oak Flat!Absolutely! Terry Rambler was very concise and deliberate with his reasons for supporting the preservation of Oak Flat too. One question on a topic that keeps coming up... If the copper ore pocket located beneath Oak Flat is truly worth extracting (obviously $billions$ to be made), why can't Resolution Copper (Rio Tinto / BHP) offer up NEPA / watershed / environmental impact studies a priori, before moving forward with any privatization of the protected land, as to simply gain the trust of all the stakeholders concerned with preserving the natural character to Oak Flat and its adjacent areas? |
|
Ben, |
BlueFrog wrote:Ben, Grijalva actually answered your question at the hearing by saying that he feels that RC's plans would not survive the transparency and public input that NEPA would require. In other words, RC likely believes it has little chance of succeeding if it needs approval for its plans prior to a land exchange. There has to be merit to this statement, otherwise why has the company insisted on a non-NEPA process with so many consecutive failed bills? Chairman Rambler was very impressive, and it was a great showing by Soyla Peralta from Superior too.The crux to RCM is the 760 acre withdrawn parcel called the Oak Flat campground. Documents released under a FOIA request made to the Forest Service show that the Forest Service has been repeatedly asked since the 1970's (by ASARCO and others) to consider lifting the 1955 withdrawal from mining and to allow mining appropriation of the Oak Flat area. Each and every time the Forest Service has been asked, they have replied that the Oak Flat area is still a heavily used area for camping and other recreational purposes--and thus the original withdrawal of the area for those purposes is still valid. RCM knows full well that another appeal made through the normal and proper process of mine approval (through the USFS) would similarly fail. They have therefore been attempting to bypass that process (and NEPA) via a legislative land exchange for the last 8 years. Curt |
|
Here's a well written account with photos of yesterday's hearing in the House about Resolution Copper. |
kirra wrote:Lobbying Dollar$ $pent- Rio Tinto Group - 2012 = $1.1 Million 2010-2011 = $1.9 Mill 2009 = $1.5 Mill 2008 = $1.5 MillThat's all? How much did the Audobaun Society, Sierra Club, etc. spend? |
