Experts see parallels between Rosemead Wal-Mart and effort to stop ...

While opponents of the latest Azusa Rock Quarry mining plan have collected enough signatures to take the matter before voters, some experts believe the effort could backfire. Full Story
First Prev
of 15
Next Last
Zeus

Arcadia, CA

#282 Oct 19, 2010
BruceBKind wrote:
You keep talking about the "huge risk", yet you champion their "rights" and placate them at every turn. It is not me that is the threat, it is the destructive strip mining. That is precisely the reason I am against the expansion. The people in the neighborhoods you mention do not want the mining or the expansion. They will now have a chance to speak for themselves, something you tried very hard to deny them.
The huge risk that this poster is talking about is that if the new plan is defeated, then the mining will go East into the backyards of those communities mentioned and also that Vulcan will sue for vested rights for the entire 270 acres.
David

Lancaster, CA

#283 Oct 19, 2010
Zeus wrote:
<quoted text>
When are you going to get it through your thick skull that mining can NOT be stopped!
They will mine in one direction or another.
Again it is YOU who are confused about this. The only ones claiming that mining can be stopped are Vulcan and the four members of the City Council in their deceptive flyers:
http://nominingexpansion.org/fliers/
Zeus wrote:
<quoted text>
If you don't believe me just ask your leader Rocha. He KNOWS this!!!
Again you have the wrong information. The president of the AAME is JeriV.
Zeus wrote:
<quoted text>
Azusa will be hurt if the new plan does not get support. Rocha knows this too.
That is a lie. Not only does he not believe it he in support of the referendum. All anyone has to do is watch the meeting from last night:
http://www.ci.azusa.ca.us/media/
Zeus wrote:
<quoted text>
He thinks that there is some magical plan out there that somehow no one has thought of in the last 10 years that will make everyone happy.
Not so.
Actually there is a plan that everyone liked except Vulcan. The only reason it was not considered was that it did not put enough money in Vulcan's pockets.
Zeus wrote:
<quoted text>
If this plan gets defeated, Vulcan will sue the city for Vested rights over the entire 270 acres and they will win.
That is wrong on several levels. Vulcan has tried that in other cities in which they had much clearer Vestment and still lost.
Zeus wrote:
<quoted text>
Then all of you should be made to face the residents who you will be hurting and take full moral and finacial responsibility.
What a joke. She really thinks she is "Zeus". Are you going to try to hurl lightning bolts at us next?

What we are seeing from "Zeus" is the last desperate gasp of the greedy plan that is about to be overturned.
Zeus

Arcadia, CA

#284 Oct 19, 2010
AtoZ wrote:
I champion Vulcan's rights because it was city of Azusa's "mistake to correct" after they allowed these newer communities to be built close to the mining. Eventually, City of Azusa did step up and work out a solution for both Vulcan and these newer communities that were at risk.
It's your group's actions that threaten what the city of Azusa has worked so hard to protect their residents.
The disclousure that were signed by residents in these communities only stated that they were aware that a mining operation existed nearby. Nothing more.
Neither the City of Azusa nor the developer of these communities warned the buyers thereof in the disclosures that the mining would continue to potentially encompass a massive 270 acres, that the mining would destroy a ridge in their backyards or that it was scheduled to continue till 2038.
There is a huge risk to the city of a massive class action lawsuit here.
The city of Azusa is right in trying to protect their own residents.
David

Lancaster, CA

#285 Oct 19, 2010
Zeus wrote:
<quoted text>
The huge risk that this poster is talking about is that if the new plan is defeated, then the mining will go East into the backyards of those communities mentioned and also that Vulcan will sue for vested rights for the entire 270 acres.
Now you are just entirely out of touch. They cannot sue for "Vested Rights". They use "Vested Rights" to sue for mining rights. And the "Vested Rights" were granted to a different company for a different agreement over a decade ago.
David

Lancaster, CA

#286 Oct 19, 2010
Zeus wrote:
<quoted text>
The disclousure that were signed by residents in these communities only stated that they were aware that a mining operation existed nearby. Nothing more.
Neither the City of Azusa nor the developer of these communities warned the buyers thereof in the disclosures that the mining would continue to potentially encompass a massive 270 acres, that the mining would destroy a ridge in their backyards or that it was scheduled to continue till 2038.
There is a huge risk to the city of a massive class action lawsuit here.
The city of Azusa is right in trying to protect their own residents.
And the referendum will do that by defeating the agreement that grants the rights to mine the entirety of the site.

btw, if the referendum does not pass the same class action lawsuit could come from Duarte and, since it affects a lot more residents it would be much larger.
Zeus

Arcadia, CA

#287 Oct 20, 2010
David wrote:
<quoted text>
And the referendum will do that by defeating the agreement that grants the rights to mine the entirety of the site.
btw, if the referendum does not pass the same class action lawsuit could come from Duarte and, since it affects a lot more residents it would be much larger.
You are wrong. Vulcan can sue for the rights to mine the entire 270 acres.
Why don't you have a sit down with the Vulcan representatives and get their side of the story.
As far as who is most affected, all you have to do is look at the pictures of what each optionm would do to our mountains to see that our city would be much more impacted by the mining to the East.
David

Lancaster, CA

#288 Oct 20, 2010
Zeus wrote:
<quoted text>
You are wrong. Vulcan can sue for the rights to mine the entire 270 acres.
Yes, they can sue, but that does not mean they will win. Also, the new agreement not only does not prevent that, it also guarantees that they will win when they do sue to go back to the east.
Zeus wrote:
<quoted text>
Why don't you have a sit down with the Vulcan representatives and get their side of the story.
Already heard their side. They lied.
Zeus wrote:
<quoted text>
As far as who is most affected, all you have to do is look at the pictures of what each option would do to our mountains to see that our city would be much more impacted by the mining to the East.
Yes, those nice photoshopped images which have nothing to do with reality. As I pointed out it is the City Staff that claims that Duarte is most affected. So you are calling them liars? Your claim also means that the EIR is a lie since that is what the City Staff's claims are based on.

Do you have any evidence that City Staff lied and the EIR is wrong or are you just trying to B.S. the people of Azusa again?

It won't work the people of Azusa are too smart for you.
David

Lancaster, CA

#289 Oct 20, 2010
Zeus wrote:
<quoted text>
You are wrong. Vulcan can sue for the rights to mine the entire 270 acres.
BTW, according to YOU the only way this could happen is if the CUP is also overturned. So you are finally admitting that you don't believe the Azusa City Attorney!
David

Lancaster, CA

#290 Oct 21, 2010
Zeus wrote:
<quoted text>
You are wrong. Vulcan can sue for the rights to mine the entire 270 acres.
So you would rather just GIVE them the rights to mine the entirety of the site as the new development agreement does?
I don't believe the citizens of Azusa are just going to roll over and give Vulcan everything they want.
Zeus

Arcadia, CA

#291 Oct 21, 2010
David wrote:
<quoted text>
So you would rather just GIVE them the rights to mine the entirety of the site as the new development agreement does?
I don't believe the citizens of Azusa are just going to roll over and give Vulcan everything they want.
You are an idiot.
What I am refering to is the vested rights to mine the entire 270 acres.
They already had the rights to mine the Eaternly 80 acres and the new development agreement exchanged the Easternly 80 acres for the Westernly 80 acres.
Get your head out of your rear for a moment will you?
Zeus

Arcadia, CA

#292 Oct 21, 2010
David wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, they can sue, but that does not mean they will win. Also, the new agreement not only does not prevent that, it also guarantees that they will win when they do sue to go back to the east.
<quoted text>
Already heard their side. They lied.
<quoted text>
Yes, those nice photoshopped images which have nothing to do with reality. As I pointed out it is the City Staff that claims that Duarte is most affected. So you are calling them liars? Your claim also means that the EIR is a lie since that is what the City Staff's claims are based on.
Do you have any evidence that City Staff lied and the EIR is wrong or are you just trying to B.S. the people of Azusa again?
It won't work the people of Azusa are too smart for you.
First, let's just say that if all of Azusa has the same brain capacity that you do, we are truly in trouble.
Azusa will never advance past the capacity of it's smartest and brightest so let's hope you are an exception rather than the rule in our city.

Second, you like the contraversy and the attention you are getting from it. You do not want to find a solution or a compromise because then you will be back to being a nobody like you have always been. This issue has given you noteriety that you would not have otherwise ever dreamed of in your looser life time.

Third, the pictures that I am refering to are the ones of the mining going to the EAST as was scheduled before our council made the very wise decision to move it further away from our residents and into a less visible area.
The new plan has a larger impact on Duarte but it is only a tiny, tiny fraction of the impact that the old plan that was in place would have had if the mining continues to the East.
The mining will go on in one direction or another. The impact will be much greater to everyone under the old plan.
Take a look for yourself.
You are sooo narrow minded it's really sad.
Zeus

Arcadia, CA

#293 Oct 21, 2010
David wrote:
<quoted text>
So you would rather just GIVE them the rights to mine the entirety of the site as the new development agreement does?
I don't believe the citizens of Azusa are just going to roll over and give Vulcan everything they want.
It's a wap!
80 Acres on the East for 80 acres on the West.
What part of that don't you understand genius??
The new plan is going to give Azusa a better future plain and simple.
Observer

Azusa, CA

#294 Oct 21, 2010
Who's a wop? In the battle of wits David is leading by at least 30 lengths over Zeus.
David

Lancaster, CA

#295 Oct 21, 2010
Sigh, again we just have to count the MANY ways that the FACTS contradict your opinions:
Zeus wrote:
<quoted text>
First, let's just say that if all of Azusa has the same brain capacity that you do, we are truly in trouble.
You really have no idea who I am so your comments are nothing more than grade-school insults which you believe make you look smarter. They don't, it is obvious to everyone in Azusa that you are motivated solely by greed and self-interest.
Zeus wrote:
<quoted text>
Azusa will never advance past the capacity of its smartest and brightest so let's hope you are an exception rather than the rule in our city.
Again you think too little of the people of Azusa. There are a great many bright people who live there, none of which have the same selfish motivations that you do.
Zeus wrote:
<quoted text>
Second, you like the controversy and the attention you are getting from it.
You do not want to find a solution or a compromise because then you will be back to being a nobody like you have always been. This issue has given you noteriety that you would not have otherwise ever dreamed of in your looser life time.
Again you have no idea who I am so your opinion is, by definition, disproven.
Zeus wrote:
<quoted text>
Third, the pictures that I am referring to are the ones of the mining going to the EAST as was scheduled before our council made the very wise decision to move it further away from our residents and into a less visible area.
Those are the same photoshopped artificial images that I was referring to so again you are proven wrong.
Wisdom does not come from throwing your trash in your neighbor’s yard.
You should try to consider the rest of Azusa instead of just mountain cove, since the west will be just as visible to them, but, again we know you lack the capacity for selfless thinking so we no longer expect this of you.
Zeus wrote:
<quoted text>
The new plan has a larger impact on Duarte but it is only a tiny, tiny fraction of the impact that the old plan that was in place would have had if the mining continues to the East.
That, again is not according to Azusa City Staff, but please do keep pointing out how wrong they are on all of their conclusions.
Zeus wrote:
<quoted text>
The mining will go on in one direction or another.
Yes, the mining will TRY to go on in one direction or another and we will be there to fight it no matter which direction is goes.
Zeus wrote:
<quoted text>
The impact will be much greater to everyone under the old plan.
Take a look for yourself.
We have looked at all the bias, doctored photos and we hear Vulcan's broken promises. Then we look at the mountain and realize that that is how they will leave not only the east but the west as well.
Vulcan always breaks its promises when money is concerned. They broke their promise on the referendum already and they will continue to break their promises even to you.
Zeus wrote:
<quoted text>
You are sooo narrow minded it's really sad.
Again, it is you who fails to see past Vulcan's PR fantasies. When you decide to live in the real world let us know. If you can check your ego you can join us to keep Vulcan from mining in your back yard, which is guaranteed in the new plan.
David

Lancaster, CA

#296 Oct 21, 2010
Zeus wrote:
<quoted text>
It's a wap!
80 Acres on the East for 80 acres on the West.
What part of that don't you understand genius??
The new plan is going to give Azusa a better future plain and simple.
OMG, that again. Even Vulcan doesn't make that claim anymore, where have you been?
Long ago Vulcan admitted that swapping 80 partial mined acres for 80 pristine acres is NOT a swap. They then went to great lengths and had the Azusa mining consultant change their numbers in order to fudge some volumetrics that seemed to be equal.
FACTS have since disproven those numbers.

We know that you are determined to quote Vulcan PR dispite its lack of authenticity but could you at least stop quoting fantasies that even Vulcan gave up on months ago.

“The Ravaged Canyon City”

Since: Feb 10

Azusa

#297 Oct 24, 2010
Zeus wrote:
<quoted text>
First, let's just say that if all of Azusa has the same brain capacity that you do, we are truly in trouble.

You are sooo narrow minded it's really sad.
You keep talking about intelligence comparisons, yet I doubt you will step up and actually compare IQ scores with any of us. I'm sure yours will fall far below anyone on the good side of this argument.

“The Ravaged Canyon City”

Since: Feb 10

Azusa

#298 Oct 24, 2010
Bruce pot head wrote:
<quoted text> You need to lower your pot intake because your postings make no sense. Do you have munchies ?
You can't comprehend the simplest jokes or witticisms, yet you expect to understand documents like the EIR, CUP, and Development Agreement? What university did you attend? Let the adults figure this one out.
Bruce Knoles

Azusa, CA

#299 Apr 7, 2012
You anonymous people are a bunch of cowards.
Bruce Knoles

Azusa, CA

#302 Oct 13, 2012
Hey, you crybabies got your wish. Are you happy now? Jerks

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 15
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

San Gabriel Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Man enters plea in abduction, rape (May '10) 2 hr Set u straight 33
It is customary for the men to pay 5 hr Spellbound 5
UCLA FOOTBALL NOTEBOOK: Neuheisel says Prince w... (Sep '10) 10 hr Fight On 27,930
Council rejects Kare offer (Sep '08) 11 hr Lena 253
Boy released in San Bernardino triple shooting ... (Nov '09) Thu Jay 7
Lawsuits allege OneWest bank can profit from fo... (Feb '10) Oct 22 hubertfields00 16
Van Nuys man expected to be charged with attemp... (Oct '09) Oct 21 Arlofkshtup 54

Beach Hazards Statement for Los Angeles County was issued at October 25 at 2:44AM PDT

San Gabriel News Video

San Gabriel Dating
Find my Match

San Gabriel Jobs

San Gabriel People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

San Gabriel News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in San Gabriel

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]