Town of Florence sticks to their guns. The Town of Florence seems to have better grasp on the facts surrounding the land proposed to mined by Curis. Apparently the new State Land commisioner has not been made of aware of the history or past planning with the Town regarding the site. Not that this will change the States opinion, just that the opposition has more ammo at their disposal. It also complicates the issue and could make it more difficult to obtain the needed permits. Below is copied from the letter;
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Commissioner Baier:
I am in receipt of your letter and it seems clear to me that ASLD is under a number of gross misunderstandings with regards to this property. I wanted to provide you with some additional information to clarify the situation as it seems you have been misled to believe a story that really never occurred.
First, and most importantly, this property has never been commercially mined. Period. You indicate that there has been a forty year history of mining on this site, however that history does not reflect any sustained or commercially viable operation. Any assertion that the history is forty-years rich is just purely fictitious. The only history is one of speculation peppered with testing.
In 1972 Conoco conducted tests at the site only to be dormant for twenty years. Then beginning in 1992 the site was the subject of studies to determine if in-situ mining was feasible under Magma and BHP Copper. These tests culminated in the installation and test operation of 13 extraction and injection wells that lasted 100 days with dozens more wells strictly for monitoring. Furthermore the intensity of those operations was a fraction of a percent of what Curis proposes.
When you contemplate the gallons of toxic acid pumped that will be pumped into the ground, Curis’ commercial operation will inject more than one hundred million times more acid into the ground than during the test phase. The pre-feasibility tests injected acidic solutions at a rate of only 120 gallons per minute. Curis’ anticipated 2,000 wells that will operate with an injection rate of 11,000 gallons of acidic solution per minute for a 20 year duration. By the time Curis has concluded its operations at the Curis copper project more than five billion gallons of sulphuric acid will have been pumped into the ground. Those pumping and extraction rates during the test were far too low to test how the ground and aquifer will react to stresses such as Curis’ commercial operations will impose. In addition, it is important to note that when those tests were conducted, the surrounding property had not yet been slated for residential development. The scale, context, and environment of Curis’ proposal are way out of line with the historic activity at the site.
You also indicate that “ASLD did not want to include this parcel in the recent annexation” because of mining activity potential. This is in fact not at all the case. The owner of the surrounding property at the time of annexation activity, Harrison Merrill, determined that going through the annexation process with the ASLD would only serve to frustrate and slow his annexation activity down and decided not to engage with ASLD on the annexation. There was not one discussion with ASLD (and there were many) that indicated the ASLD had a future interest in mining that they were hoping to preserve by not annexing. You might check with the former Land Commissioner, Mark Winkleman, as you were not with the Department at that time. I am sure he will explain that they did not contemplate mining whatsoever.
A review of the State Land Department’s Urban Land Planning and Oversight Committee (the “ULPO Committee”) activity would also help give you proper historical context. They voted to recommend the taxpayer funded State Land Pinal County Plan to the Commission for final adoption and approval on May 17, 2007. Taxpayers had at that point paid almost $50,000 to Community Services Corporation, an outside planning consultant, who determined that this property had the potential to be developed in one of three ways, two of which considered the majority of the parcel to be suitable only for medium density residential with a small commercial subparcel. The third iteration would have contemplated being about one third medium density residential and designate two thirds for employment. The ULPO Committee agreed and voted to recommend approval of the plan. Arguably the only land plan ASLD has for this land is classified for predominantly residential use with a potential commercial component but not at all for mining but. If you are to review the history of this site and discussions Florence had over the course of many years with ASLD, you will see that this property was always consensually determined to be best used as consistent with our Florence General Plan.
As if the taxpayer funded plan, and ULPO Committee vote wasn’t enough to demonstrate a very long history of ASLD intent to develop the 160 acres consistent with the Merrill Ranch development, ASLD actually attended and testified at our Florence General Plan hearings on October 20, 2008 and through Michelle Green, an ASLD representative, stated that the department was “in support of the General Plan Amendments and looks forward to working with the Town on future projects.” If you review our Florence General Plan, it indicates that this property will be developed consistent with the adjacent property with the designation of medium density residential.
I assume that because you were not at the Land Department when all of this happened you are relying on others to inform you of the past intentions expressed by ASLD about the development of this land. I wanted to write you and let you know that someone is not giving you anything close to accurate information.
- Neither the 160 acre ASLD land, nor the surrounding privately owned land was ever mined commercially – ever. To try to justify this decision on the basis of “this is what we always planned” is revisionist history and not at all based in any sort of fact whatsoever.
- ASLD did not decide not to annex when Merrill Ranch was annexed, the master developer determined it would take too long and be too complicated for him to process your land with his.
- ASLD authorized payment of $50,000 in taxpayer money to have an outside land planner to plan this land. The outside planner, after significant review, proposed a plan showing this predominantly medium density residential and this plan was adopted unanimously by the ULPO Committee.
- Indicating that a mine of this sort will be less negatively impactful on the possibly cultural resources on the property than a residential or commercial development is simply unfounded and incorrect. While a residential or commercial development might be able to locate around significant archaeological features, a mine will have very limited options as to where they can actually conduct their mining activity.
- It is odd that there is no analysis of the significant future liability that your decision over the next several years might have on state taxpayers. If the mine has any environmental contamination issues (note that there have been no in-situ mines around the world that have been able to restore groundwater to pre-mining conditions, and there is an EPA report and a 10 year monitoring history showing that if this land is mined in-situ radiochemicals could be released into the groundwater) either during operation or after closure, that Arizona State Taxpayers will be left holding the bag on the clean-up (which in the past has amounted to billions of dollars over decades). This seems like a major risk that is not even being addressed and it is risk not only to your direct beneficiaries but to us all as taxpayers in the State of Arizona.
- If this property were not located in an area that ASLD has 5,000++ acres of land just upstream of the flow of the water table then saying that this project will be lucrative for the trust might be rationale. In this case, because the ASLD has a fiduciary duty to all of the Trust beneficiaries, and it is clear that unless this mine is an exception to every single in-situ mining project around the globe, and can restore groundwater to pre-mining conditions, permitting this to locate here will gravely diminish the value of your surrounding holdings. Not only will this diminution occur upon just approving the lease, as those lands are planned for residential and commercial uses, but once they are contaminated by the upstream flow of the flow of the groundwater (the acquifers “communicate”), this is a real threat to the health safety and welfare of our State and your beneficiaries.
- I am unsure how the ASLD has the qualified Staff to make a review of the health safety and welfare impacts of this project on the land in advance of an EPA or ADEQ decision. It was surprising to me that you would come out and indicate you had no opposition prior to the agencies that are tasked with actually determining the health, safety and welfare of the project had opined.
I was a bit surprised that you, being a former Phoenix City Councilmember and presumably wanting to continue on with your public service career, would choose to totally ignore a local communities land use plan, community sentiment (7 to 1 in opposition to the mine), or public Council vote (on November 7, 2011 the Town Council voted unanimously to deny the proposed mine) and after reading your letter I think it is simply because those who are informing you of the information are simply misrepresenting the facts. I am unsure of how you would, in good conscious, and in protecting the other Trust beneficiaries, decide it makes sense to wipe out the value in the massive ASLD holdings surrounding this site but am hopeful that with this further information you are able to make a good decision for the beneficiaries and the taxpayers of Arizona.
I have heard many wealthy investors say that the most lucrative deal they made was the one they, after study, passed on because the risks would have killed them or their other investments. In this case that notion is a most fitting thought for me to conclude this letter.
Sincerely,
Tom Smith, Vice Mayor
Town of Florence
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The town is really digging their heals in on this land use issue. I would'nt be surprised if this causes a longterm setback for Curis. It's not just the town of Florence but also every other town within the state that will have an issue with the state turning tail on it's approval and support for the Towns planned land use.