RE: A few points... elgin, I'm don't understand the reasoning behind your rambling diatribe. But I can only surmise that you are heavily invested thus the reason for your defensiveness. I have only tried to post the facts so that others can make a reasonably sound decsion before sinking their funds into this project. I openly welcome any criticism of my opinions but will soundly argue any mistatements made that are presented as fact.
I have no connection once so ever with any of the organized opposition. I would also like to say that I am all for Curis prospering with this venture. My sole interest being investment driven is the reason I have invested so much time analyzing this project.
In response the points you made:
Point 1 - I agree with what you are saying. This also shows Curis Managemnts lack of business savvy and credulous attitude.
Point 2 - Yes I have read the letter. And after reading it again I don't agree with the one-sidedness of your statement. The letter is directly in reference to ASLD's stance regarding mining on the State Trust Land portion. ASLD has no interest once so ever regarding any other lands. The State of Arizona stands to benefit from mining on both the State Trust parcel and the portion owned by Curis. So their may be some politics involved with this letter. The letter specifically states "...the 160-acre State Trust parcel is heavily encumbered with archaeological and cultural resources, as are much of the immediately surrounding private lands, wich likely make it largely unsuitable for residential or commercial development." Read that again elgin - it say's "immediately surrounding private lands". How accurate is your statement "...It says and refers to private lands ie not Curis and state lands"? The property owned by Curis that encompasses the State Trust parcel is "private land". The areas of land owned by those who are opposed to the operation are quite substantial. Mass grading has been done on thousands of acres in preparation for master planned communities with no archaeological findings. Also consider the site of the mine is immediately adjacent to the Gila River, this is where resource sensitiviy is the highest. Your blanket statement regarding the letter is artlessly misleading.
Point 3 - I admit I don't know the specifics of how the land was aquired but don't see how this fits into the debate. Your comments made in this point are really going off base. Although I will say It would be most interesting to discuss these broad opinions with you in person.
Point 4 - Let the record speak for itself.
Point 5 - Your are absolutely correct on this point. My point was that the Town must plan ahead and protect any future potential water sources. The aquifer that serves Town residents north of the mine is down graidient from the proposed mining area. So it is very important for the Town to ensure the ICR operation is safe. This is evidenced in the report prepared by Montgomery & Associates.
Point 6 - The fact is developers have given to the Town and State. In reference to your question; "How much money does Florence want...?". Thats an open ended question. Curis should have been able to come to terms with the Town given more seasoned management. The Town is not in the school building business so I don't see how that would be a benefit. Florence school district is an entity of the State not the Town. In Arizona the State is responsible for funding and managing the school system not Towns and Cities. Impact fees generated by developement pay for growth - Police, Fire, Parks, Baseball Diamonds, Trails, etc. I can recall a few things given by the developers; Town - land for a new fire department, State - New K8 school. There may be more but I will agree the developers are not in the business of giving. Growth pays for itself by way of taxpayers. This generates revenue for the town. Impact fees and community maintenance facility agreements passed on by the developers to homeowners pay for services. The Town could care less whether these services are paid for by the developer or the taxpayer as long as it doesn't come out revenues generated by taxes. Why pour money into Main Street ? I can see coughing up a few dollars for matching grants but nothing substantial. It's not to difficult to figure out what the Town wanted. 1.7 million per year - That's exactly what they wanted.