Campaign contributions in Azusa give ...

Campaign contributions in Azusa give insight into who is fighting in mining battle

There are 198 comments on the San Gabriel Valley Tribune story from Nov 12, 2010, titled Campaign contributions in Azusa give insight into who is fighting in mining battle. In it, San Gabriel Valley Tribune reports that:

A group bent on turning back a new mining plan is hoping its $5,000 in campaign contributions will be enough to overcome $239,000 spent by a mining company to promote the project.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at San Gabriel Valley Tribune.

First Prev
of 10
Next Last
AAME

Azusa, CA

#181 Dec 27, 2010
There has been reclamation language for over six decades with no reclamation done or planned in actuality. Why would Azusa believe a sic decade old lie now? Vote No on Measure A. Not only no , but hell no!
Yes on Measure A

Altadena, CA

#182 Dec 29, 2010
NO on A wrote:
We think stricter regulation means voting NO on mining expansion. We think Measure A is an obvious giveaway to Vulcan, a giveaway of 80 acres. The "swap" is a one word lie. Azusa Rock has not mined or wanted to mine the East side of Fish Canyon for well over 20 years. Vulcan's Canyon City Alliance is just an astro-turf corporate machine front for Vulcan.
How can it be a "giveaway" when Vulcan owns the property and has for years. You see how lame you sound? Azusa Rock is the entity company that owns the quarry. Vulcan is the holding company that bought Azusa Rock in 1999. Yes they do and have wanted to mine all the property (270 acres). The city negotiated for them to only be on 80 acres of THEIR OWN PROPERTY. Along with that the city gets tremendous environmental and financial assurances and benefits.
You want to let them keep mining as usual or do you want to put restrictions and reclamation in their WRITTEN CONTRACT?
Hell NO

Azusa, CA

#183 Dec 31, 2010
Yes on Measure A wrote:
<quoted text>
How can it be a "giveaway" when Vulcan owns the property and has for years. You see how lame you sound? Azusa Rock is the entity company that owns the quarry. Vulcan is the holding company that bought Azusa Rock in 1999. Yes they do and have wanted to mine all the property (270 acres). The city negotiated for them to only be on 80 acres of THEIR OWN PROPERTY. Along with that the city gets tremendous environmental and financial assurances and benefits.
You want to let them keep mining as usual or do you want to put restrictions and reclamation in their WRITTEN CONTRACT?
What we want is for no expansion of the mining to occur. We are way past the point of wondering IF you are lying. We now wonder WHY you lie so much and so obviously. The city negotiated nothing, but rather allowed Vulcan to get their wish to expand and destroy 80 acres on the West side of Fish Canyon that they previously could not mine. The "assurances" have been an age old promise that has never been kept. Take you expansion and your lies and stick them where the sun don't shine.

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#184 Jan 3, 2011
Now that we have some supporters of Measure A, how about taking on the invitation to have an open debate at a public place? I noticed you have all ignored that call... hmmmm wonder why. No facts to prove Measure A is for the good of the people huh?

Vote NO on MEASURE A!
Public Debate

Azusa, CA

#185 Jan 3, 2011
We, the residents of Azusa, would like to see a public debate between the members of Azusans Against Mining Expansion and members of Vulcan's Canyon City Alliance. We want to be able to ask questions about Measure A and have them answered with equal time allotted to each side.
Yes on A

Newbury Park, CA

#186 Jan 3, 2011
Public Debate wrote:
We, the residents of Azusa, would like to see a public debate between the members of Azusans Against Mining Expansion and members of Vulcan's Canyon City Alliance. We want to be able to ask questions about Measure A and have them answered with equal time allotted to each side.
this was done at the five planning commission meeting and council meetings that were held for public participation. Was that not enough?
NO on A

Azusa, CA

#187 Jan 3, 2011
Yes on A wrote:
<quoted text>
this was done at the five planning commission meeting and council meetings that were held for public participation. Was that not enough?
You're kidding, right? The public got five minutes while the corporate destructos and their lackey minions had hours of power point presentations. Case in point; "...if the two sides agree, the mining will end in 2038." Now who are those two sides? The city and Vulcan. Hardly any better than bedfellows I'd say. Enough? The public was basically ignored while the bull ran rampant through the china closet. Hell no it wasn't enough. Why the hell do you think we needed this referendum? Did you hit your fricking head or something?
AAME

Azusa, CA

#188 Jan 3, 2011
We actually only had three minutes of speaking time at many of those meetings. Maybe it was a "done deal" the whole time and we were just basically laughed at as we lined up to speak with our little hearts in our hands, somehow hoping that we would be listened to.
Yes on Measure A

Altadena, CA

#189 Jan 10, 2011
AAME wrote:
There has been reclamation language for over six decades with no reclamation done or planned in actuality. Why would Azusa believe a sic decade old lie now? Vote No on Measure A. Not only no , but hell no!
That is where you are wrong. There has been "reclamation". The mayan steps are the reclamation mandated from the previous agreement. It's a joke right? That was the only thing required of them. Vulcan (Azusa Rock) has been compliant with was required of them. That is why it is important to vote YES on MEASURE A so we can get state of the art reclamation and higher standards than what they have in place right now with existing mining. Think about it. Does it make sense to you yet?
AAME

Azusa, CA

#190 Jan 10, 2011
Yes on Measure A wrote:
<quoted text>
That is where you are wrong. There has been "reclamation". The mayan steps are the reclamation mandated from the previous agreement. It's a joke right? That was the only thing required of them. Vulcan (Azusa Rock) has been compliant with was required of them. That is why it is important to vote YES on MEASURE A so we can get state of the art reclamation and higher standards than what they have in place right now with existing mining. Think about it. Does it make sense to you yet?
This is blatantly not true. The 1988 agreement specified "soft contours matching the natural topography...and ongoing re-vegetation". Those typical mining benches are what you can see in almost any open pit mine anywhere in the world and have nothing to do with reclamation. To top it off, Vulcan did none of that and has made no attempts to reclaim anything in the 12 years they have been here. "Microbenching" is state of the art fantasy and will be no different than concrete steps that nothing can grow on. What makes no sense is that we would allow Vulcan to mine another 80 acres in exchange for more damned promises. Vote NO on Measure A! Save our views, our health and most of all, our dignity.
NO on A

Azusa, CA

#191 Jan 10, 2011
Tweedle Dee says Tweedle Dum is compliant, it must be true!
Duarte Citizen

United States

#192 Jan 12, 2011
So whats the status on the propaganda by Vulcan to stop the referendum? These past few weeks its been rather quiet, hardly any discussions... I would think now that its getting closer to the date to vote we would have major discussions.
NO on A

Azusa, CA

#193 Jan 12, 2011
Vulcan's Canyon City Alliance refuses to comply with rules just as Vulcan refuses to comply with mining rules. Maybe someone will make them comply. Who knows? Vulcan is pouring hundreds of thousands of dollars into their effort to delude the public and push Measure A (the mining expansion) on the residents of Azusa. Some are confused by their tactics, but many don't like the expansion and are not swayed by bucks and/or BS. They have a small hardcore group of obsequious flunky lackeys that are probably in it to suck up to the people they admire for being slimy and corrupt.
socalga

Trabuco Canyon, CA

#194 Jan 19, 2011
how about Measure B
Vulcan and the city of azusa are responsible for all the health care of any citizen affected by this?
Funny that environmentalists will climb trees to prevent them from being chopped
down, but a whole mountain? No problem.
The list of payoffs must be staggering

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#195 Jan 20, 2011
socalga wrote:
how about Measure B
Vulcan and the city of azusa are responsible for all the health care of any citizen affected by this?
Funny that environmentalists will climb trees to prevent them from being chopped
down, but a whole mountain? No problem.
The list of payoffs must be staggering
Good Point.
NIMBY

Azusa, CA

#196 Jan 27, 2015
Well look up there now. Who was right?
Saul Greenberg

Fremont, CA

#197 Jan 27, 2015
"Following months of meetings, public input and controversy, the Azusa City Council voted 4 to 1 to allow Vulcan Materials Company to expand its mining operations from a currently approved and partially mined 80 acres on the east side of its 270 acre property to a pristine mountain ridge above Duarte homes and schools. The council also voted 4 to 1 to give first reading approval to a development deal, expected to generate in excess of $67 million in advance mining fees, additional extraction surcharges and other financial incentives for the City of Azusa over the life of the agreement to extend to 2038. The deal is also expected to generate hundreds of millions of dollars for the Birmingham, Alabama based Vulcan."

“History continues to repeat itself in Azusa. Bad decisions were made by political leaders in the 1920’s to allow rock mining to destroy the landscape, and bad decisions were repeated by Azusa councils in the ‘50s,‘80s,‘90s, and here we are again. A sad legacy,” said George.
toldyouso

Azusa, CA

#198 Feb 11, 2015
Look, look now. Who told the truth and who is up for re-election?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 10
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.

Vulcan Materials Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Report outlines Azusa mining impacts on Duarte (Dec '09) Aug '15 hill side 56
News Vulcan Materials Denies Man's Accusations (Jul '10) Apr '13 Irritated 26
News Caroline mining lawsuit winding through court (Dec '12) Dec '12 allen howard 1
News Our View: Never-ending Vulcan spat (May '10) Jan '12 BuildingAngel 4
News Vulcan Materials consolidation leaves fate of K... (Jan '12) Jan '12 real bigT 2
News Caroline Approves Black Marsh Mine (Aug '11) Aug '11 stonewall park 1
News Azusa residents approve Vulcan mining plan by 2... (Jan '11) Jan '11 Duarte Citizen 2
More from around the web